LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

University  of  California. 

RECEIVED    BY    EXCHANGE 


Class 


7s\  ; 


DEMOSTHENIC   STYLE 


IN   THE 


PRIVATE  ORATIONS 


THESIS 

PRESENTED    TO    THE    BOARD    OF    UNIVERSITY    STUDIES 

OF    THE   JOHNS    HOPKINS    UNIVERSITY    FOR    THE 

DEGREE    OF    DOCTOR    OF    PHILOSOPHY 


WILLIAM   HAMILTON  KIRK 


BALTIMORE,  i8g^. 


BALTIMORE 
THE    FRIEDENWALD    COMPANY 


r895 


DEMOSTHENIC   STYLE 


IN   THE 


PRIVATE  ORATIONS 


THESIS 

PRESENTED    TO    THE    BOARD    OF    UNIVERSITY    STUDIES 

OF   THE   JOHNS   HOPKINS   UNIVERSITY   FOR   THE 

DEGREE   OF    DOCTOR   OF   PHILOSOPHY 

BY 

WILLIAM  HAMILTON  KIRK 

BALTIMORE,  1895. 


mi  VIE-   ./?Y 


^w 


B  A  L  T  I  M  (JJUT 

THE   FRIEDENWALD   COMPANY 

1895 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


I 


http://www.archive.org/details/demosthenicstyleOOkirkrich 


CONTENTS. 

I. — Establishment  of  Tests. 

1.  Denunciation 8-9 

2.  Repetition 9-1 1 

3.  Asyndeton 11-12 

4.  Irony 12-14 

5.  Apostrophe 14-IS 

6.  Interrogation 15-18 

7.  Rhetorical  Answer 18-19 

8.  Deictic  Expressions    . 19-21 

9.  Transitions 21-22 

10.  Prooemia 22-25 

II. — Comparison  with  Lysias  and  Isaeus. 

1.  Denunciation 26 

2.  Deictic  Expressions 26 

3.  Apostrophe 27 

4.  Interrogation  ;  Rhetorical  Answer 27-28 

5.  Irony 28-30 

6.  Repetition 30-32 

7.  Asyndeton;  Prooemium 32-34 

III. — Examination  of  Suspected  Speeches. 

1.  Oration  32      34-35 

2.  "        33 35-36 

3-         "        34 36-38 

4.        "        35 38-39 

5-        "       40 39-41 

6.        **        46 41-42 

7-        "        56 42-43 


166468 


% 


DEMOSTHENIC  STYLE  IN  THE  PRIVATE 
ORATIONS. 


I. — Establishment  of  Tests. 

Of  the  sixty  speeches  which  have  been  handed  down  to  modern 
times  under  the  name  of  Demosthenes,  forty-two  (Orr.  18-59)  are 
pleadings  before  a  court ;  and  of  these  again  twenty-nine  (27-50, 
52-56)  are  more  nearly  defined  as  ^^oyot  idtioruoi — a  term  which 
has  no  exact  equivalent  in  English,  and  which,  even  in  Greek,  is 
not  absolute  in  its  definition,  since  Or.  51  (jTep\  rod  GTt<p.  t^? 
Tpirjpap)^.')  in  all  manuscripts,  and  in  some  Orr.  57-9  (jtpdq  Eu^oo- 
Xidfjv,  xard  Osoxpivou,  xard  Neacpaq),  appear  in  this  class  (Blass,  Att. 
Ber.  Ill  49-50).^  This  uncertainty  is  reflected  in  the  pages  of 
Blass,  in  whose  index  these  four  orations  are  entered  under  the 
heading  Privatrederiy  although  in  his  remarks  on  58  and  59  (III 
440,  476)  he  emphasizes  the  fact  that  they  belong  among  the 
bixaviAoX  dr][x6(jioi.  Or.  57  he  qualifies  (III  429)  as  being  in  char- 
acter, though  not  by  strict  construction,  a  private  speech,  and  he 
seems  half  inclined  to  yield  a  like  place  to  Or.  51  (III  215).  But 
the  latter  was  delivered  before  the  Athenian  Senate,  and  its  theme 
is  the  claim  to  a  public  distinction ;  the  former  is  addressed  to 
an  ordinary  court,  and,  although  connected  with  a  public  measufe, 
deals  with  matters  of  an  essentially  private  nature ;  I  have  there- 
fore followed  Blass  in  including  it  among  the  idtwnxoi,  while 
leaving  51  in  the  class  to  which  it  formally  belongs. 

The  question  how  many  of  these  speeches  may  be  considered 
Demosthenean  has  been  variously  answered,  and  certainly  with 
more  reasonableness  by  Blass,  who  reckons  fourteen  (including  57) 
than  by  the  more  destructive  among  modern  critics.  The  first 
speech  against  Stephanus,  Or.  45,  has  been  a  great  stumbling- 
block,  and  Arnold  Schafer's  objections  to  its  morality  blinded 
him  to  the  beauties  of  its  style ;  but  Blass  has  given  a  plausible 

'  Cited  by  the  pages  of  the  first  edition. 


reason  for  the  advocacy  of  ApoUodoriis  by  Demosthenes,  and 
stylistically  the  speech  refuses  to  be  excluded.  Schafer's  argu- 
ments against  the  genuineness  of  the  third  speech  against  Aphobus, 
Or.  29,  have  been  sufficiently,  though  not  exhaustively,  refuted 
by  Blass ;  and  his  view,  which  was  also  that  of  Westermann,  that 
this  speech  is  the  forgery  of  a  late  rhetorician,  is  wholly  untenable, 
as  well  for  this  as  for  any  other  of  the  private  orations.  The 
most  marked  feature  common  to  all,  to  the  obviously  spurious  no 
less  than  to  the  admittedly  genuine,  is  their  character  of  reality. 
They  deal  with  cases,  and  enter  into  details,  such  as  no  forger 
would  have  been  at  the  pains  to  handle  or  invent ;  the  poorest 
among  them  is  instinct  with  that  breath  of  life  which  literature 
draws  only  from  contact  with  fact ;  and  the  purity  of  their  Attic 
dialect  gives  final  assurance  that  those  which  are  not  by  Demos- 
thenes himself  must  be  attributed  to  contemporaries  of  his  and  to 
the  best  period  of  Attic  oratory. 

For  distinguishing  the  genuine  from  the  spurious,  or  for  assign- 
ing certain  of  the  latter  to  a  possible  common  author,  vocabulary 
is  an  aid  to  be  used  with  much  caution.  Two  influences  conspired 
to  keep  the  language  of  these  brief  compositions  as  nearly  as 
might  be  on  a  level  with  the  ordinary  phraseology  of  educated 
Athenians  :  first,  their  intensely  practical  spirit  and  purpose  ;  and 
secondly,  the  fact  that  at  Athens  a  suitor  usually  pleaded  his  own 
case,  and  often  did  so  in  a  speech  prepared  for  his  inexperience 
by  some  trained  and  practised  orator.  Dionysius  of  Halicar- 
nassus  dwells  on  the  art  with  which  Lysias  assumed  the  layman  ; 
the  stronger  genius  of  Demosthenes  showed  an  even  more 
wonderful  pliancy  in  this  respect ;  and  if  inferior  speech -writers^ 
were  incapable  of  achieving  a  like  delicate  perfection,  they  were 
certainly  guided  by  the  same  general  conception  of  fitness. 
Individuality  of  expression  must  have  been  further  obscured  by  a 
rhetoric  which  prescribed  stock  arguments  and  reflections  and 
allowed  set  formulas  of  introduction  or  conclusion ;  and  when  we 
remember  how  little  remains  out  of  an  immense  mass  of  oratory 

'  It  is  to  be  regretted  that  in  English  the  word  logographer  should  be 
employed,  after  Thuc."  i,  21,  to  denote  writers  of  history.  The  Greek 
?u}yoypd^og  usually  signifies  one  who  wrote  speeches  for  others  to  deliver  ; 
and  we  need  both  logograph  and  logography  to  express  a  practice  which  is 
never  to  be  left  out  of  sight  in  considering  the  forensic  oratory  of  the 
Athenians,  and  which  had  much  to  do  with  its  unrivalled  excellence. 


I 


subjected  to  this  rhetoric,  we  may  hesitate  to  find  evidence  for 
individual  authorship  in  the  coincidence  of  phrases  often  essen- 
tially commonplace.  In  his  attempt  to  show  that  one  man  was 
the  author  of  the  speeches  against  Macartatus,  Euergus  and 
Olympiodorus,  as  well  as  of  those  in  behalf  of  Apollodorus 
(excepting  the  first  against  Stephanus),  Blass  has  not  only  laid 
undue  stress  (III  496,  500-1)  on  such  coincidences,  but  has  some- 
times neglected  to  observe  that  expressions  which  he  reckons 
distinctive  are  to  be  found  in  compositions  of  other  authorship. 
Thus  the  predicative  use  of  i^  dvayx-qq  can  be  paralleled  from 
Isaeus,  2.  22  and  3.  65 ;  for  the  combination  of  £u{^uq  or  ed^Hwq 
with  Tzapa^pT/fxa  compare  i.  11  and  3.  7.  48  of  the  same  author 
and  Dem.  29.  15  ;  in  Dem.  15.  7  and  39.  24  we  find  axoXou^oq 
in  the  sense  in  which  Blass  quotes  it  for  46.  17  and  48.  4,  or,  if  he 
insists  on  an  impersonal  neuter,  we  can  point  to  Ep.  3.  10, 
where,  however,  the  construction  is  with  the  genitive,  not  the 
dative.  That  sart  dk  ^pa^oq  6  Xoyoq  is  a  mere  formula  is  plain 
from  the  variations  found  in  3.  23,  21.  77.  160,  34.  3  (compare  also 
18.  196  and  Lys.  24.  10,  ou  TioXhq  6  Xoyoq,  sc.  iffri)  ;  it  can  hardly  be 
that  the  critic  attaches  importance  to  the  particular  form  in  which 
this  trivial  sentence  is  cast.  The  essential  difference  between  the 
introductory  sentences  in  43. 31, 48.  33,  and  those  in  27.  13,  29.  39, 
54.  6  lies  in  the  greater  neatness  and  compactness  of  the 
Demosthenean  formulas ;  but  all  are  shaped  on  the  same  model, 
and  it  cannot  surprise  us  that  at  a  lower  level  of  art  there  should 
be  less  variety  of  execution.  Distinctions  of  style  fade  with  a 
decrease  in  artistic  power  and  refinement ;  and  even  if  the  common 
authorship  for  which  Blass  argues  is  not  improbable,  it  cannot 
properly  be  maintained  on  the  ground  of  stereotyped  expressions 
or  literary  imperfections  which  may  belong  as  easily  to  several 
inferior  writers  as  to  one  alone.  Even  in  larger  spheres  of  com- 
parison the  importance  of  vocabulary  as  an  index  of  style  lies 
chiefly  in  the  tone  and  spirit  which  words  convey  ;  otherwise,  the 
difference  between  prose  and  poetry  would  be  in  the  main  a 
mechanical  one,  which,  with  the  Greeks,  it  never  was. 

This  protest  against  an  occasional  over-interpretation  of  unim- 
portant phenomena  does  not  affect  the  sense  of  obligation  which 
I,  in  common  with  all  students  of  Demosthenes,  feel  to  the  great 
work  of  Blass.  The  German  critic  has  usually  trodden  a  surer 
path  and  taken  a  broader  sweep  ;  that  it  is  still  possible  to  glean 


where  he  has  reaped,  I  hope  to  show  in  the  following  pages, 
where  I  shall  first  take  note  of  certain  traits  of  Demosthenic  style 
exhibited  in  the  fourteen  private  speeches  accepted  as  genuine, 
and  shall  then,  after  a  glance  at  Lysias  and  Isaeus,  proceed  to 
examine,  from  the  point  of  view  thus  gained,  some  of  the  doubtful 
orations.  And  I  shall  begin  by  calling  attention  to  a  class  of 
words  which  stands  in  intimate  relationwith  the  tone  of  the  orator, 
and  the  use  or  omission  of  which  may  fairly  be  said  to  have  an 
artistic  value  and  effect. 

Denunciation. 

This  is  what  may  be  termed  the  vocabulary  of  denunciation, 
which  comprises  words  expressive  of  the  adversary's  baseness  or 
impudence.     Such  are  the  adjectives  watd^jq  (36.  33,  37.  3.  27, 

54.  38),  avaiffxovToc;  (27.  18,  29.  53,  55.  28),  7:o)^7jp6c;  (45.  80,  54.  24, 

55.  30),  xaxSq  (30.  4,  45.  4),  aSuoc;  (29.  27,  30.  4,  36.  55,  45.  80), 
(paoXuc;  (37.  50),  fiiapoq  (36.  58,  37.  48),  ^delupoq  (54.  22),  avoaioq 
(28.  16),  dxd^aproq  (2,7.  48),  ax^rXwc;  (29.  19,  30.  46) ;  the  adverbs 
dvac8(bc;  (27.  16.  24.  62),  alaypibq  (27.  57.  62,  29.  49),  ddUutq  (57.  5), 
7:Xeov£xrix€)q  (57.  5);  the  substantives  dvaideta  (27.  22.  24.  31.  34, 
29.  I,  31.  6,  36.  61,  37.  45,  45.  44.  71.  73,  54.  37,  55.  8,  57.  64), 
dvat(Txo>T{a  (27.  38.  64,  38.  5),  7:o>7]pta  (27.  26,  36.  56,  45.  2,  54.  37), 
aiaxpoxipdeta  (27.  38.  46,  29.  4,  45.  2),  r.avoupyia  (29.  5 1,  30.  24), 
fitapia  (29.  4),  xaxoupyia  (45.  39).  To  these  may  be  added  the 
verbs  dvaiaxwrtlv  (29.  57,  45.  44)  and  -avovpy^vj  (29.  5).  I  omit 
such  words  as  o^pK;  and  daiXyeia,  which  are  specifically  applicable 
to  cases  of  violence,  and  cite  only  those  passages  in  which  the 
term  of  reprobation  appears  as  a  clear  and  frank  expression  of  the 
speaker's  own  sentiments  concerning  his  adversary. 

An  examination  of  this  hst  reveals  two  facts  worthy  of  note:  the 
first,  that  Orr.  39  (the  first  against  Boeotus)  and  41  (jzpoq  I-oodiav) 
are  absent  from  it ;  the  second,  that  the  proportion  of  denuncia- 
tory expressions  is  larger  in  the  speeches  delivered  by  Demos- 
thenes himself  than  in  those  composed  at  a  later  period  for  clients. 
The  five  orations,  27-31,  contain  thirty-one  such  words  against 
thirty-four  to  be  found  in  seven  other  speeches ;  and  fifteen  occur 
in  Or.  27  (xara  'AcpoiSoo  a'),  ten  in  Or.  29,  while  Or.  45,  longer  than 
either  of  these  and  extraordinarily  bitter  in  tone,  has  not  more 
than  eleven.  It  would  seem  that  in  his  youth  Demosthenes  gave 
a  freer  rein  to  the  passion  which  seeks  issue  in  vigorous  and  down- 


right  abuse,  while  later  he  learned  to  clothe  the  same  sentiment  in 
a  more  refined  and  subtle  expression.  The  triumph  of  this  refine- 
ment is  seen  in  the  first  speech  against  Boeotus,  where,  without 
the  employment  of  any  harsh  word,  the  adversary  is  loaded  with 
scorn  and  rebuke.  The  cause  lies  in  the  rji^oitoua^  of  the  speech ; 
Mantitheus,  whose  case  has  no  support  in  law,  wishes  to  arouse 
in  the  judges  a  sense  of  what  is  fair  and  considerate  ;  accordingly 
he  poses  throughout  as  a  person  of  scrupulous  fairness,  and 
displays  an  ostentatious  consideration  for  the  rights  and  feelings 
of  a  brother  whom  he  despises  and  repudiates,  while  admitting 
and  satisfying  his  legal  claims.  Recalling  the  situation  presented 
in  Or.  41,  we  may  trace  there  the  influence  of  the  same  element. 
A  respectable  citizen  of  mature  years  has  a  dispute  about  property 
with  Spudias,  the  husband  of  his  wife's  sister ;  he  regards  Spudias 
as  a  litigious  individual  (§2  TzoVAxiq — sh^Lffiihoq,  §24  oW — r^apip-^s- 
rai),  and  does  not  hesitate  to  speak  his  mind  about  the  course 
pursued  by  him  (§29-30  did  rdbra  •/,.  r.  f.);  but  as  there  is  no  other 
quarrel  between  them,  and  obviously  no  desire  on  his  part  to 
envenom  this  and  destroy  all  harmony  in  the  family,  the  respect- 
able man  refrains,  in  rather  a  dignified  way,  from  using  harsh  and 
unpleasant  epithets. 

Repetition. 

Rhetorical  figures  belong  to  the  common  stock  of  oratory  ;  but 
some  of  them  at  least  possess,  or  are  capable  of  receiving,  such 

^  By  this  term  I  wish  to  denote  the  expression  in  the  writer's  style  of 
the  speaker's  personality  ;  it  applies  only  to  those  speeches  which  were 
written  for  others  to  deliver,  and  has  nothing  to  do  with  characterizations 
of  a  third  person  {xapaK-ripLaiiog).  Thus  in  the  speech  for  Phormio  (36)  the 
ijdoTzoua  lies  only  in  the  complete  self-suppression  of  the  advocate  ;  in 
such  speeches  as  those  against  Pantaenetus  and  Conon  the  mental  linea- 
ments of  the  speaker  are  in  a  measure  revealed  to  us.  Of  course,  this 
reflection  of  character  in  style  is  an  artistic,  not  an  absolutely  truthful,  one. 
For  this  somewhat  arbitrary  use  of  an  elusive  and  ill-defined  word  I  find 
support  in  Nicolaus  Sophistes,  Progymn.  in  Spengel  Rhet.  Ill  489: 
T/OoTzoua  earl  TioyoQ  dp/xd^cov  rolq  vKOKeifievoi^,  rj^oQ  rj  'ko.'&oq  kjucpaivuv  rj  koL  avva[i- 
(j)6Tepa  '  dpfzo^cov  fiev  rolg  vTiroKeifievoig,  EKecdij  del  oroxd^eo-^ac  koI  tov  Tieyovroq  Kat 
TTpbg  ov  "keyet  •  fj'&oq  6k  Kal  ird'&og  tj  kol  avvajucporepov,  eTVEtd^  fi  irpbg  rd  Ka-&67iov  rig 
d7roj3?J'!ret  rj  Tvpog  to  ka  Trepiardaeug  yivojuevov.  The  idea  here  conveyed  is  not 
always  easy  to  distinguish  from  that  implied  in  the  term  to  TrpiiTov  ;  but 
the  definition  is  more  consistent  and  satisfactory  than  those  which  con- 
found 7]-&oiroua  on  the  one  hand  with  TrpoawKOTzoua^  on  the  other  with  the 
purely  moral  rj'&og. 


10 

distinctive  tone  and  character  as  to  cast  light  on  the  mental  quali- 
ties of  the  writer  who  uses  them.  Among  the  figures  of  speech 
{axriiJ-ara  U'^tio<-)  employed  by  Demosthenes,  Blass  notices  repeti- 
tion in  its  various  forms.  Of  these,  epanadiplosis  ^  is  not  very- 
common  in  the  private  speeches;  I  have  observed  only  seven 
examples  :  ohx  ean  tovt'  ohx  effzt,  27.  57,  29.  49  ;  jSorji^TJaar*  o5v  i^filv 
^o7ji^ij(TaT£,  28.  20;  ou  fid  AC  oby^  29.  ^9;  tooto  dij  tout',  41.  22; 
a2X'  ouy  ouTocn  Z.  oux  cuxvrjffe,  45.  56;  Tzir^ripoq  a>  a.  M.  Tzovrjpoc;  ohroq 
45.  80.  Anaphora  is  much  more  frequent,  either  in  asyndeton — 
which  is  decidedly  the  strongest  form — or  with  connectives, 
usually  fikv — di.  Of  the  asyndetic  arrangement  we  find  examples, 
with  iteration  of  one  word,  in  36.  38  (6V  ivec/xaro,  6V  eiffB-npa^aro, 
Off'  sUfjipe),  ib.  53  (the  negative  particle  five  times  repeated),  37. 
36.  37,  38.  28,  54.  28;  of  two  words  27.  38  (rdbr'  00  /xsydXrj  xai 
TZtpKpavTjq  dvaiff^uvTta  I  raDr'  ouy  UTzep^ukrj  dsiur^q  aiff^poxepdeiaq  ))^  30. 
30?  37*  44-  Examples  with  ixh — di  are  more  in  number :  27.  30 
{xtxTfiiihirj  fih — xtxTT^ixivov  di)^  28. 18,  37.44,  38. 16  (where  the  shift 
of  tense  shows  that  the  speaker  might  have  said  rore  fxkv — vDv  8i, 
and  that  rove  is  used  for  the  sake  of  the  emphasis  which  lies  in 
repetition),  39.  34,  41.  22,  45.  21.  42,  55.  20.  35  ;  and  with  change 
of  inflection  m  36.  23  {yeyevrjiiivoo  fiiv — y£yev7j;xiv7)q  di^  and  45.  86  (a 
double  instance  :  duu?.ot  [ih  ixslvot,  douh)^  8'ouroq  ^v,  dsa-Korai  d'u/xslq^ 
SsffTtoTTjq  d'^v  kyu)).  Formally,  of  course,  anaphora  may  be  said  to 
occur  with  the  repetition  of  any  word,  however  unimportant  or 
inevitable ;  but  the  repetitive  effect,  which  comes  sharply  and 
vigorously  in  the  reiteration  of  the  monosyllabic  demonstrative, 
29.  45  (compare  also  ri  di,  39.  15),  is  hardly  to  be  felt  with  less 

'  In  the  terminology  I  have  here  followed  Blass,  III  144-7  ;  cf.  also  Reh- 
dantz,  Neun  Philipp.  Red.  Ind.  pp.  5-6,  12,  22,  Ernesti,  Lex.  Techn,  Rhet. 
Thus(£7r)avaJi7r;ia)aiC  is  the — asyndetic — repetition  of  a  word  within  the  same 
clause,  or  (Dem.  28.  20)  of  a  word  which  itself  constitutes  a  clause;  in 
(£7r)ava^opd  two  or  more  clauses  begin,  in  avriarpo^i]  end,  with  the  same  word 
or  words  ;  ovj.i'KTMK.rj  is  the  combination  of  these  two  figures,  or,  in  substance, 
the  repetition  of  a  clause  of  several  words.  In  KVKkoq  the  second  clause 
ends  with  the  initial  word  of  the  first,  in  avacrpo<^7]  it  begins  with  the  last 
word  of  the  preceding  clause.  The  various  relations  might  be  symbolized 
as  follows : 


1 


epanad. 

a  a 

anaph. 

a — ,  a — 

antistr. 

-b,— b 

gviittTi, 

a— b,  a— b 

KVK. 

a — ,  — a 

anastr. 

— b,  b— 

II 

accumulation,  such  as  we  see  in  29.  7  or  41.  ii.  Anaphora  with 
three  words  connected  by  ij  appears  in  31.  13  (jtaiq  kazt.  dixatov — 
ij  7t.  L  <5.) ;  and  the  same  passage  shows  a  somewhat  irregular 
form  with  change  of  inflection  (^dv  /xiv  oydorjxovra  fivaiv  d^fjq  opouq, 
SydoTjxovra  fxvdg  ehai  rijv  7cpo~ixa\  as  well  as  two  clear-cut  examples 
of  anastrophe  (^av  dk  itkeiovoq  -Kkelov,  idv  d'  iXdrrovoq  e'Aarrov),  tO 
which  figure  there  is  an  approach  in  31.  3  (si  dtxaiwq — dtxaiwq), 
and  30.  24  (o)q  drcXol  Tivzq — aTzkibq  ouS'  dv  ficxpov).  There  is  an 
imperfect  xuxXoq  in  57.  54  (^yov — ^^ov),  antistrophe  in  45.  38 
(^iiriTpoTTeuffac.  fxev  xard  diad^TjXrjv — obd^  i-ntrponeu^TjVac  xard  dcai^ijx7jv\ 
ib.  82  (ei  pTjdevoq  ruiv  ilXXiov  eXarrov^  ifxou  y'  eXazrov)^  and  in  45.  37  tWO 
fine  examples  ;ioted  by  Blass,  III  147,  of  auinzXoxij ;  a  third,  less 
perfect,  occurs  in  29.  .14  (a>c  T^^p^  p-iv  zivioi^  aa<prjq  i)  ^daa^oq,  Ttsp), 
8'ao  zi'^iov  00  aacpyjq).  In  37.  3  {dixojv — dixrjv')  there  is  a  rather  loose 
application  of  the  principle  of  repetition. 

This  figure,  which  conveys  an  eflfect  of  insistent  lucidity  and 
energy,  is  sufficiently  well  represented  in  the  private  speeches  of 
Demosthenes  to  be  cited  as  characteristic,  though  his  use  of  it  is, 
on  the  whole,  sparing.  It  appears  with  most  frequency  and  in 
greatest  mass  in  Or.  45,  but  is  relatively  less  abundant  in  the  other 
speeches  written  for  clients  than  in  the  five  delivered  by  the  orator 
himself,  and  is  very  weak  in  two  of  the  finest  orations,  39  and  54 
(xazd  K6vu)voq),  and  in  one  of  the  longest,  57  (jtpdq  Ed^ouXtdr^v').  In 
these,  however,  we  find,  with  other  marks  of  the  great  orator's 
hand,  numerous  examples  of  a  still  more  important  rhetorical 
figure,  which  has  also  a  syntactical  value,  asyndeton. 

Asyndeton. 

This  is  employed  by  Demosthenes  with  no  little  variety  of  tone. 
It  is  least  eflfective  when  merely  explanatory,  as  in  57. 41  (o  Upwzo- 
pa^oq  Tihriq  ^v) ;  and  the  weakest  use  of  this  explanatory  asynde- 
ton is  found  in  the  resumption  of  the  speech  after  the  introduction 
of  documents  or  testimony.  To  the  expression  of  feeling  this  con- 
struction lends  great  force;  compare,  for  indignation,  29.  3,  30.  8. 
24.  38,  36.  50,  37.  40,  45.  80  (two  fine  examples  of  fierce  energy), 
55'  25.  31,  57.  60.  There  is  scorn  in  30.  14  and  31.  8  ;  irony  in  31. 
12,  36.  52,  39-  34-  36,  57-  61 ;  pathos  in  45.  85  and  57.  36.  A  use 
of  the  asyndeton  to  express  haste  and  eagerness  is  found  in  the 
introduction  of  testimony  ;  the  command  to  the  clerk  is  usually 
prefaced  by  xai,  ow^  (to  di^  but  often  Demosthenes  says  curtly 
Aa/S^,  or  Xi^'s. 


12 

This  figure  acquires  greater  weight  when  it  is  made  cumulative 
by  the  asyndetic  sequence  of  several  clauses  or  words.  It  may 
then  convey  an  effect  of  rapidity  and  may  be  strengthened  by 
anaphora;  cf.  37.  36  (av  rixprj  rtq,  av  OTzk'  intyipr)^  av  iTruararifivi^), 
39-  35.  57-  28,  and  especially  the  very  elaborate  example  in  28.  20, 
which,  in  the  words  Uersuto  ayrt^oXo),  shows  a  heightening  of  the 
force  by  an  accumulation  of  words  cognate  in  meaning,  a  figure 
which  is  also  described  as  a  form  of  epanadiplosis  (Blass,  III 
147);  cf  36.  52  {iXauvziq  dtcoxsiq  auxncpw^relq)^  ib.  47,  39.  34.  In 
37.  14  vividness  is  thus  given  to  the  action  of  a  third  person. 

Participial  clauses  are  also  found  in  asyndetic  sequence ;  cf.  27.48 
(r^v  dia^TJx7)v  TJ^a'^r/.ora,  zd  d^dpdrzoda  Tzeizpaxora^  raXX^  odtu)  izdvra  diw- 
xTjxoTa),  where  this  construction,  occurring  at  the  end  of  a  long 
polysyndeton,  gives  a  strong  effect  of  increasing  warmth  and 
vehemence,  which  is  heightened  by  the  hammering  beat  of  the 
homioteleuton.  In  29.  55-7  there  is  a  succession  of  nine  participial 
clauses  without  connectives  ;  shorter  complexes  of  like  character 
appear  in  41.  16  and  57.  56.  In  41.  14  two  participles  are  com- 
bined with  an  adjective,  in  54.  27  with  a  substantival  expression 
of  time ;  in  54.  30  a  relative  clause  stands  between  two  substan- 
tives, and  in  45.  36  the  two  participles  have  substantival  force. 
Often  the  whole  series  consists  of  substantives,  to  the  utterance 
of  which  this  figure  may  lend  an  air  of  haste,  as  in  30.  17,  39.  9, 
or  of  serious  emphasis  and  stress,  as  in  57.  24.  55,  while  emphasis 
is  colored  with  indignation  in  36.  53  and  45.  39. 

Among  figures  of  thought  ((T/7jfiara  diavoiaq)  three  stand  out 
prominently  in  the  style  of  Demosthenes :  irony,  apostrophe,  and 
interrogation. 

Iro7iy. 

The  quality  of  his  irony  is  vivid  and  cutting;  cf.  28.  6,  31.  12 
(00  -portpov  y*  ri  r^apd  (To\,  vov  el  dXyju^r/  Xiyec;'),  36.  44  (<T£  yap  dv 
TtpoTEpov  ■)^p-q(Trov  Inoirjffsv  d  ^v  ^tt'  kxeivw)  ;  see  also  30.  20,  36.  54, 
37-  38,  where  in  the  sarcastic  emphasis  given  to  the  opponent's 
name  there  is  a  concentration  of  the  irony  which  suffuses  the 
whole  context  of  these  passages.  This  suffusion  with  ironical 
coloring  is  very  noticeable  in  Or.  39 ;  it  appears  also  in  Or.  37 
and  in  long  episodes  of  Or.  36.  43-7  and  49-54.  Especially  to 
be  remarked  is  the  accumulation  of  sneering  phrases  in  36.  52, 
37.  36.  Sometimes  again  the  utterance  is  very  brief,  as  in  the 
scornful  dXX'  00  d-qitou  w  S.,  41.  16,  and  the  sharp  side-cut  in  38.  20 

(oTZoToi  TLviq  eiaiu  dyvibreq)^ 


n 


13 

The  temper  which  reveals  itself  in  ironical  utterances  is  visible 
also  in  other  ways  in  Demosthenes ;  as  in  the  scornful  roughness 
of  36.  44  (ttSv  av  dyvoijaetaq)^  37.  31  (xaizot  rtq  S.v  aol  dpa^fiijv  sSioxe 
fJ-io-v),  45.  66  (aAA'  ^m  tw  xspdaiveiv  Ttay  wj  ooroq  Ttoiijffeisv),  and  in 
the  paradoxical  turn  of  29.  13  {ffo^tffzrjq  xdl  ff<p6dp'  ixajv  rd  dixai^ 
dyvoelv  7:po(j7zoiobiJ.evoq:  repeated  in  a  slightly  different  form, 
30.  36),  and  of  45.  19  {ooTOi  de  <pwpai^£l£v). 

The  same  sense  of  superiority,  the  same  air  of  towering  above 
the  adversary,  is  manifested  in  the  rebukes  which  Demosthenes 
sometimes  administers.  Compare  the  tone  of  28.  9  (dW  dvayx-q 
fjLsydXrj  X.  r.  f.),  and  of  38.  27  (^7r'  ixeivoK;  ixXdsT^  uv  o\q  kTzoielre 
dixaiwq) ;  compare  Or.  39  passim^  and  especially  the  mingled 
irony  and  rebuke  of  the  passage  beginning  dXX'  w  xf^XeTrcurare 
Botiori,  34  ;  finally  much  of  the  passionate  arraignment  in  Orr.  36 
and  45.  A  similar  feeling  finds  expression  befitting  the  youth  of 
the  speaker  in  54.  23.  34.  40,  and  in  the  naive  irony  of  55.  18 
(ow  ydp  ixTiielv  ■jrs  d-JTZoo  x.  r.  A.). 

It  is  to  be  remarked  that  in  Demosthenes  apostrophe  is  often 
tinged  more  or  less  deeply  with  irony ;  many  of  the  passages 
cited  above  are  apostrophic  in  form.  Further,  what  is  important 
to  recall,  this  (txw^  of  the  rhetoricians  is  in  truth  a  ??£<r,  a  mental 
habit,  and,  like  all  innate  tendencies,  would  be  prone  to  emerge 
whenever  occasion  permitted,  while  to  minds  not  thus  endowed 
by  nature  it  would  be  less  attainable  than  the  more  mechanical 
among  the  figures  of  thought.  And  as  Demosthenes  would, 
where  he  could,  give  free  play  to  this  quality  of  his  mind,  so, 
where  he  was  obliged  to  hold  it  in  check,  we  may  yet  expect  to 
see  it  revealed  by  brief  flashes,  little  darting  tongues  of  ironic  fire. 
This  is  what  happens  in  Or.  57,  and  it  seems  to  me  one  of  the 
most  satisfactory  guarantees  for  the  authenticity  of  that  speech. 
A.  Schafer's  doubts  concerning  it  arise  from  the  freedom  and 
boldness  with  which  Euxitheus,  a  man  of  inferior  position,  con- 
fronts his  powerful  enemy,  Eubulides ;  but  the  Athenians  prided 
themselves  on  their  nappTjaca,  and  it  was  essential  to  the  complete- 
ness of  his  defense  that  the  speaker  should  expose  the  character 
and  motives  of  his  accusers.  Accordingly  he  is  bold  and  down- 
right in  asserting  those  facts  which  he  can  prove  to  their  discredit, 
as  in  stating  the  proofs  of  his  own  citizenship ;  but  the  conscious- 
ness of  his  weakness  in  the  face  of  this  "  gang"  (of  TuOra)  ffuvearu)- 
'^£^)  §13)  cf.  §10  and  §16),  and  the  circumstances  of  the  time, 


14 

inspire  a  nervous  anxiety,  which  is  easily  felt  in  the  lengthy  and 
generalizing  prooemium,  in  the  eager  pathos  of  the  conclusion,  in 
the  appealing  humility  of  §36  (ixrjdaixibq  w  a.  d.  x.  r.  i.)  and  §45 
(xa£  yap  ei  raneivdv  x.  r.  A.),  in  the  resigned  tone  of  §33  {aXka  yap 
X.  T.  A.)  and  of  §66  mit.  This  nervousness  tempers  the  boldness 
and  causes  a  certain  indirectness  of  speech  in  attack;  cf  §7  (rcq 
— xaracTTafftaffi^eiq),  and  the  vague  form  given  to  the  accusation  of 
sycophancy  in  §§32,  34,  49.  It  is  true  that  the  first  of  these  slurs 
is  followed  by  a  more  direct  denunciation  (iize} — dta^dlke^q)  ;  but 
the  speaker  at  once  checks  himself  and  falls  back  on  insinuation 
(a  yap  o/ie'tq  iffre  x.  r.  A.).  The  same  fear  of  venturing  too  far 
appears  in  the  fleeting  shade  of  irony  conveyed  by  the  repetition 
of  the  proper  name,  §15-16;  and  the  more  vigorous  sneer  in  §5 
(xai  fj.dXXov  r)  Tzpoar^xev)  is  yet  very  brief.  A  comparison  of  this 
speech  with  the  first  against  Stephanus  or  with  the  defense  of 
Phormio  shows  the  full  extent  of  the  reserve  which  has,  however, 
not  prevented  the  orator  from  bringing  out  clearly  much  that  is 
damaging  to  the  accuser.  It  is  the  ironic  tendency  controlled  by 
an  admirable  art  which  produces  this  subtle  blending  of  frank 
vigor  with  tremulous  slyness ;  and  here,  as  elsewhere,  we  feel  the 
iji^oTioita  which,  with  Demosthenes,  consists  not  in  descending  to 
his  client's  level,  but  in  raising  the  latter  to  his  own  height ;  he 
dignifies  the  lowly  Euxitheus,  as  he  lends  grace  to  the  rusticity  of 
the  opponent  of  Callicles  and  loftiness  to  the  rage  of  Apollodorus.^ 
Apostrophe  and  interrogation  are  figures  at  any  orator's  com- 
mand; and  while  their  absence  from  a  speech  has  a  certain  signifi- 
cance, the  effect  of  their  presence  depends  on  the  tone  imparted 
to  them  by  their  position  and  by  the  feeling  which  they  convey^ 

Apostrophe, 

In  the  use  of  apostrophe — a  term  meant  here  to  include  only 
the  act  of  turning  from  the  judges  to  address  the  adversary — 
the  fourteen  speeches  exhibit  great  variety.  There  is  no  example 
of  this  figure  in  Orr.  27  and  30;  only  one,  and  that  very  brief 
in  Or.  54 ;  while  it  abounds  in  Orr.  36,  37,  39  and  45,  and  is 
not  infrequent  in  the  remaining  speeches.  Sometimes  it  occu- 
pies passages  of  considerable  length,  as  in   28.  7-10,  36.  43-54, 

'Other  examples  of  irony  or  superiority  of  tone  in  27.  22,  28.7,  29.  14, 
31.  10.  \2fin.,  36.  21.  34,  37.  34.  54,  39.  13.  38.  16.  26,  41.  20.  24,  45.  26.  30.  50,. 
54.  41  fin. 


15 

45-  78-80;  sometimes  is  confined  to  a  brief  phrase  or  two,  as  in 
31.  12,  41.  26,  45.  84,  57.  31.  The  apostrophe  is  essentially  pas- 
sionate in  tone,  and  is  therefore  in  general  not  used  by  Demos- 
thenes as  a  mere  vehicle  of  argument ;  the  exceptions  are  sus- 
ceptible of  explanation  on  artistic  grounds.  So  in  certain  rapid 
and  brief  passages  (36.  10.  19.  22,  39.  24,  41.  26)  the  personality 
gives  a  sharper  point  to  the  argument,  an  effect  which  depends  on 
the  very  brevity  ;  the  incontrovertible  statement  is  like  a  defiance 
flung  at  the  adversary/  In  39.  28  we  have  a  passage  which  may 
be  explained  by  the  influence  of  the  dramatization  in  ti — ovo[j.a] 
having  fallen  thus  into  direct  address,  the  orator  continues  it  to 
the  end  of  the  short  argument.  Or.  31  (the  second  against 
Onetor),  a  very  short  and  very  passionate  speech,  closes  in 
mingled  apostrophe  and  interrogation;  it  would  seem  as  if  the 
reduction  of  these  emotional  figures  to  an  argumentative  and 
expostulatory  tone  were  the  only  way  in  which  the  orator,  with 
little  space  at  his  command,  could  pass  from  the  vehement  fierce- 
ness oieTzsLza  TO  decvorarou  and  the  sharp  questions  following  it 
into  the  quieter  and  more  dignified  manner  better  suited  for  the 
delivery  of  the  final  words.  In  Or.  55  (j:pdc  KaXXixXia)  also  the 
apostrophe,  in  §5-7  and  §29,  is  infused  with  expostulation ;  that 
is  a  part  of  the  rjf^oTzoda  of  the  speech,  and  contributes  to  the 
impression  of  youthful  candor  and  honest  simplicity  which  the 
speaker  makes  upon  us.  But  a  dominance  of  the  argumentative 
quality  is,  on  the  whole,  unusual  with  Demosthenes;  more  char- 
acteristic are  the  sudden  and  brief  turns  on  the  adversary  of 
which,  among  the  speeches  exhibiting  this  figure,  Or.  28  alone 
furnishes  no  example.'' 

Interrogation. 

The  question  also  must  be  considered  with  reference  to  the 
varying  degrees  of  force  involved  in  it;  its  primary  effect  in  style 
is  to  express  the  irruption  of  feeling,  and  in  judging  a  particular 

1  There  is  a  very  beautiful  instance  of  this  in  36.  20-1  ;  the  argument  is 
first  hurled  at  Apollodorus  in  the  form  of  a  challenge  (f/c  tto/wv — i\ayx(i'Vtq\)y 
and  is  afterwards  repeated  in  a  form  which,  though  still  aggressive,  is 
brought  nearer  to  the  argumentative  tone  by  the  use  of  the  third  person 
and  by  the  preceding  conditional  clause. 

'Other  examples  of  apostrophe  occur  in  29.  36-7.  41.  42,  31.  6-8.  13-14, 
36.  20.  30-32.  39,  37.  26.  29.  30-31.  36.  49-50-  54-  55-  57»  38.  16.  18.  23.  24.  27, 
39.  8.  9.  10.  21.  24.  26.  28.  30-32.  33-36,  41.  16.  17.  18,  45.  38.  69-70..&fcr-&i^84, 

54-40, 57  3^-32.  ,.;■? .; 

."la      *--'  '» 


i6 

style  we  have  to  ask  what  is  the  range  of  the  feeling  so  expressed. 
For  this  purpose  some  sort  of  classification  seems  necessary,  not 
like  that  quoted  from  Tiberius  by  Rehdantz,  Index,  s.  v,  Frage, 
which  looks  only  at  the  speaker's  object  in  employing  the  form  of 
interrogation,  but  one  which  shall  regard  the  content  of  each  ques- 
tion apart  from  its  rhetorical  form.  Arranging  on  this  principle 
the  interrogative  phrases  in  the  genuine  private  speeches  and 
omitting  such  rare  phenomena  as  the  imperative  and  dubitative 
questions,  I  find  that  in  each  instance  one  or  the  other  of  the  fol- 
lowing five  elements  markedly  predominates:  i)  argument;  2) 
appeal ;  3)  assertion  ;  4)  challenge  ;  5)  suggestion. 

Of  these  conceptions  the  first,  which  is  unemotional,  is  hardest 
to  discover  in  Demosthenes  ;  most  of  the  examples  which  one 
attempts  to  get  for  it  melt  away  and  dissolve  themselves  into 
assertion,  appeal,  or  challenge.  That  is  to  say,  even  when  the 
question  is  intended  as  an  argument,  the  liveliness  of  tone  which 
accompanies  it  causes  it  to  be  felt  as  something  more  emphatic. 
Compare,  however,  the  close  of  Or.  31,  already  cited  for  the  apos- 
trophe ;  the  explanation  given  for  the  argumentative  use  of  that 
figure  applies  also  to  the  interrogation  which  is  combined  with  it ; 
compare  also  36.  11  (xaixot  ei  rjv  idia  ri^  dipopfirj  rourun  Tcpoq  rfj 
rpani^Tj^  rt  dij  ttot*  dv  e^Xero  rouro  fxaXlov  ^  xsivriv  ;).  It  is  indeed  in 
hypothetical  sentences  having  a  question  as  one  of  their  members 
that  Demosthenes  approaches  nearest  to  the  tone  of  simple 
argument ;  but  if  we  contrast  the  passage  just  quoted  with  29.  20 
(xairot  ei  y'^v  douXoz — zi  /xad^wv  ^/j.apTup7j<T£>j  aXk^  oox  k^ofxoffaq  aTifiXXdyr) 
TOO  Tzpayixazoq ;),  we  see  how  the  hypothetical  form  modifies  the 
vehemence  of  the  interrogative  expression,  which,  with  the  omis- 
sion of  av,  springs  back  to  its  natural  attitude  of  aggressive  force. 

Appeal,  whether  pathetic  or  indignant,  is  very  common  ;  under 
this  head  may  be  included  especially  sentences  beginning  with 
eira  or  apa,  Cf.  28.  1 8  (ap^  00  fisydXa — ^XaTzroiiai))  )  36.56,  45.  70 
{eW  dv  opdr^  —  ou  rt/xiopTjffeff^e ;),  54.  20 ;  also  those  in  which  a 
verb  of  thinking,  or  a  corresponding  expression,  makes  an  appeal 
to  the  opinion  of  the  judges,  as  in  30.  20  (xairoi  roT  zob^^^  u/iajv 
Tziffzov ;),  57.  26  {oUzai  zt^  dv  x.  z.  X.)  ;  and  finally  the  simple 
exclamation  seen  in  30.  36  (zouzou  yivuiz'  av  ztq  (T^ezXicuzspot; 
avd^ptoTzofz  ;),  27.  28  {zi  oov — do^ei ;). 

The  assertive  question  comprises  notably  the  numerous  sen- 
tences which  begin  with  ttw?  or  ttwc  ov.     Thus,  in  29.  55,  the 


17 

demand,  ttoJc  av  dbvano  rcz  aa<piffTtpov  i^sX^y^at,  is  Only  a  rhetorical 
mode  of  saying  oux  uv  duvacrd  rsc  <Ta^.  i^.;  and  in  30.  18  the  expres- 
sion, Tzaj^  uu  <fav£pdv  on — ^rjToofftv,  differs  only  rhetorically  from 
the  St^Xov  }xh  roivuv — on — roXpMfft  Trpdrreiv  in  the  same  paragraph. 
Compare  also,  in  38.  24,  the  parenthetic  ttw^  yap  following  oneVrc 
ph  odx  tffov.  The  same  value  belongs  also  to  many  of  the  ques- 
tions introduced  by  an  interrogative  pronoun  ;  cf.  36.  44  (dXX' 
ol/xat  T^c  <J"^C  dT^h]Gxiaq — xiq  av  duvatr'  k(pui<Ti^ai  =z  obdeiq  dv  duvatr* 
i<ptxi<7i9ai),  41,  7  (r£  dv  art  pel^ov  x.  r.^  A.),  45.  41  (t{<^  yap  outw<: 
atppwv  X.  r.  ^.). 

The  tone  of  the  challenge  is  easily  felt ;  the  speaker  seems  to 
demand  an  answer  to  his  question  and  at  the  same  time  to  be  con- 
fident that  no  answer  is  possible;  cf.  29.  41  {rivi  rwv  (peudopap- 
roptdjv  i-KeffXTJipw ;  deX^ov.  dAA'  ovx  dv  e^oi<;  dsl^ai)  ;  37.  26  (ri  ydp^  ei 
xari<TTrj<T£v  Euspyoi:,  kyd)  tr*  ddtxcb  ;),  where  the  vivid  and  brief  apos- 
trophic  interrogation  turns  the  argument  into  a  defiance;  41.  22 
{ri  dij  TlOt' — auraJv  ;),  57.  55  (sir'  iyo)  ^ivo^ ;   ttoD  perotxcov  xarai^ir: ;). 

The  distinction  between  these  four  classes  is  a  subjective  one, 
dependent  on  the  reader's  feeling  ;  the  fifth  class  has  a  formal 
character,  which  renders  it  unmistakable  and  stamps  it  as  a  thing 
apart  from  the  others.  We  must  weigh  them  to  ascertain  their 
value;  it  is  a  bit  of  current  coin.  This  is  what  Tiberius  calls  the 
question  d^  -Kpoaoyj^v,  to  arouse  attention ;  and  his  term  may  be 
accepted  if  we  permit  ourselves  to  understand  it  not  of  tone,  as 
does  Rehdantz — who  objects  that  to  excite  the  attention  of  the 
hearer  is  the  object  of  every  rhetorical  interrogation — but  as 
referring  to  the  content  of  the  question.  It  suggests  to  the  judges 
what  the  speaker  is  about  to  say  and  thus  fixes  their  attention 
upon  it;  cf.  27.  38  {ybv  dk  ri  Tzotooaiv  ])  ]  41.  5  (Tivo<:  oZv  ehex^ — 
sItzov  ;)  ;   37.  26  (Troi^  obv — ypd(pat ;')  ;  57.  15  (ri — Ei>l3ouXt8rj  ;). 

The  suggestive  question  imparts  liveliness  to  narrative;  the 
challenge  is  bold  and  emphatic.  Neither  is  found  in  all  of  the 
genuine  private  orations;  I  have  noted  examples  of  the  first  only 
in  eight  speeches  (27.  38,  29.  8.  11.  19.  31.  33,  31.  3,  37.  26.  27. 
29.  36.  37.  50.  38.  25,  39.  13.  29.  35.  37,  41.  5.  18.  20.  27,  57.  8.  15. 
17.  61.  68),  of  the  second  in  nine  (28.  7,  29.  41.  47,  31.  9.  14,  36. 
20.  31.  54,  37.  26.  28.  54.  67,  38.  II.  16,  39.  14.  21.  24.  28,  41.  17. 
22,  45  38.84).  The  absence  of  either  from  a  doubtful  oration 
would  therefore  not  seem  to  be  in  itself  evidence  against  genuine- 
ness ;  but  it  may  add  greater  weight  to  other  indications  of  tame- 


i8 

ness  or  lack  of  spirit,  defects  by  no  means  Demosthenean.  It  is 
to  be  observed  also  that  eleven  out  of  the  fourteen  speeches 
exhibit  one  or  the  other  of  these  two  kinds  of  question,  and  that 
Or.  54,  which  shows  only  the  suggestion  in  indirect  form  (§13), 
and  Or.  55,  which  contains  neither  kind,  have  in  common  a  certain 
modesty  of  tone  mingled  with  pathetic  warmth,  to  which  the 
keenness  of  the  challenge  and  the  rather  dramatic  pose  of  the 
suggestion  are  essentially  foreign. 

Rhetorical  Answer. 

The  rhetorical  question  may  be  answered  rhetorically ;  and 
this  answer  may  be  put  either  as  an  expression  of  opinion  or  as  an 
assertion  of  fact.  So  we  find  in  31.  5  Iij-o\  fj.h  yap  ou8h  a>  doxsT ; 
in  31.  II  iycb  fxev  uddev  ol/xat,  which  latter  phrase  reappears  under 
varying  forms  in  ten  other  passages  :  31.  13,  37.  37,  38.  12,  39.  24, 
45-  13.  54-  20.  22.  43,  55.  13,  57.  35.'  Corresponding  affirmative 
expressions  are  ^yo)  ol/iat,  29.  34 ;  (prjaed  fav  riq,  30.  30  ;  sywy'  av 
(pai-qv,  45.  65.  Or  a  verb  of  knowing  may  be  used  with  a  negative  ; 
compare  obx  olda  in  27.  48  and  29.  24,  and  the  similar  use  of  e/o* 
in  27.  63  and  29.  57.  As  a  more  emphatic  form  of  reply  we  have 
oux  sffTt  raura,  27.  57,  29.  49,  57.  53 ;  oux  s'xet  raur'  dXyji^eca'^,  30.  34  ; 
and  the  various  combinations  of  oddi  with  other  words  in  27.  59, 
36.  19.  25,  39.  40,  45.  12,  55.  13,  57.  55.  So  too  odx  k'ueffzi  drJTZooi^eu, 
30.  16,  and  the  affirmative  Trdvo  ye,  39.  14.  In  37.  56.  60  and  38.  22 
we  find  what  corresponds  to  these  replies  in  form,  but  scarcely  in 
force,  an  appeal  expressed  by  fj.y)8a/xd)q. 

The  effect  of  these  phrases  is  to  impress  the  speaker's  opinion 
or  conviction  upon  the  mind  of  the  hearer.  The  same  purpose  is 
served  by  similar  curt  utterances  following  on  a  supposition,  as  in 
36.  22  (ouz  k'ffzt  rauza),  39.  20  (oox  k'ywy*  ■^youfiat),  45.  45  (ou  dyJTtou), 
Oftener  this  form  of  contradiction  is  introduced  by  dXXd  ;  cf.  29.  39 
(aAA'    ob-)^\   zoiouzov   iaztv),   ib.  4 1    {d?jJ   oox   TJdtxTjfxevoq   <TOxo<pa>zei<;^, 

'  31.  5  £f^ol  fiev  yap  ovSev  av  doKtl  rovrov  /xel^ov  evpe'&^vai.,  and  54.  22  eyu  juev 
yap  ov6^  cnro'&avdvT^  ol/iac,  show  in  the  use  of  the  causative  particle  a  slight 
divergence  from  the  usual  asyndetic  form  of  the  rhetorical  answer  ;  and 
there  is  a  more  substantial  difference  in  the  fact  that  the  words  evpe'&^vac  and 
a'Ko-&av6vr'*  introduce  a  conception  not  found  in  the  preceding  sentence.  In 
the  first  case  this  is  unimportant,  as  the  verb  conveys  really  the  same  idea 
as  that  expressed  by  /lel^ov  av  ri  yevoiro ;  but  the  amplification  in  a-o'&avovT^ 
ought  perhaps  to  prevent  us  from  regarding  this  passage  as  purely  rhetor- 
ical. 


1 


19 

36.  II,  37-  37,  41-  26,  54-  4i»  57-  25.  49-  S^-  So  in  29.  59  and  41.  20 
we  have  emphatic  parentheses  after  a  negative  assertion ;  in  36.  54 
the  sentence,  oux  7]dcxuu,  dAA'  olfj.ac  ffoxocpa^^reTq  vt)v,  follows  on  a 
question,  less  as  an  answer  than  as  a  refutation  of  the  implied 
hypothesis. 

As  lucid  argument  and  firm  construction  are  among  the  recog- 
nized excellences  of  Demosthenes,  it  will  be  worth  while  to  inquire 
into  the  mechanical  means  by  which  he  achieves  this  clearness 
and  solidity. 

Deictic  Expressions, 

Two  particles  seem  of  especial  importance  as  constructive 
elements :  roivuv,  and  ow  in  the  combination  jj.kv  oZv.  Both  are 
employed  to  mark  the  introduction  of  an  important  statement,  a 
new  incident,  or  a  fresh  link  in  the  chain  of  reasoning ;  they  serve 
in  a  formal  way  to  call  attention  to  what  is  about  to  be  said.  The 
attention  of  the  hearers  is  also  engaged  and  fixed  upon  a  desired 
point  by  a  free  use  in  emphatic  positions  of  the  demonstratives 
ooToq,  TotovTO'-,  ToffooTor,  iz££voc;  and  a  more  open  demand  is  made 
upon  them  by  the  employment  of  verbs  and  verbal  phrases. 
Thus  we  find,  pointing  forward,  the  futures  Sei^iu^  dtdd^w,  ^'laeads, 
yv^ffsffd^s;  the  imperatives  ^rxoTrelre,  ffxi(f>a(Ti9e,  dxouffare;  the  phrases 
Set,  or  ^Utiov  ^(ttc,  ufidq  fia^sTv,  or  dxouffat;  pointing  backward,  the 
perfects  dxTjxdare,  fxefxai^TJxarSj  ixefiaprbprirat.  There  are  also  the 
expressions  ^^Aov  ^<xrc,  (pav£p6v  ^o-rc,  padidv  lart  fiat%Tv ;  the  introduc- 
tion of  testimony  is  often  prefaced  by  hq,  or  ort,  dXr^iH^  Xiyw  ;  and 
in  the  same  connection  a  summary  of  facts  is  often  given.  The 
variety  of  such  phrases  is  scarcely  indicated  by  those  quoted;  and 
the  effect  of  variety  is  increased  by  the  habit  of  employing  several 
together;  thus  h'  eidr^re  is  often  followed  by  wq  dXrji^rj  Xiyw,  the 
latter  often  by  a  summary  of  facts.  Cf.  38.  9,  where  we  have  ore 
fiev  oZv  ....  Ixavd)^  Travra^  -^youfxai  (iep.ad^rjxivat,  on  5'  o(TTepov  .... 
rouTo  ^ouXofxat  dsl^at,  with  a  recital  of  facts  that  have  been  and  are 
to  be  stated.  A  similar  arrangement  is  found  in  54.  13;  and 
while  not  all  combinations  are  equally  full,  the  accumulation  of 
several  deictic  words  or  phrases  is  always  a  notable  feature. 

It  is  as  important  to  note  the  limitation  of  such  expressions  as 
their  use ;  both  are  well  illustrated  in  Or.  27.  About  six-sevenths 
of  that  speech,  sections  1-59,  are  taken  up  with  the  statement  of 
the  case;  and  here  we  find  fj.h  oo>  nine  times,  ror^uv  twenty  times, 
some  two  dozen  emphatic  demonstratives  and  as  many  monitory 


20 

verbs.  So  far  the  movement  of  the  speech  is  deliberate  and 
regular ;  in  spite  of  the  outburst  in  §47-8  we  feel  that  the  orator  has 
himself  well  in  hand  and  is  bent  only  on  reasoning  and  convincing. 
At  the  beginning  of  §60  he  reminds  the  judges  in  set  phrase  of 
what  they  have  heard  {roffavrrj<:  roivuv  ovaiar:  .  ,  .  oa-qv  .  .  .  TJxoOffare^ 
and  then,  putting  aside  finally  all  such  restraints  on  the  flood 
of  speech,  moves  on  to  the  close  in  a  rapid  torrent  of  crowding 
sentences,  which  breathe  mingled  denunciation  and  entreaty. 
And  since,  in  this  passage,  we  find  none  of  the  deictic  utterances 
noted  above,  it  becomes  plain  where  their  province  lies ;  they 
belong  to  demonstration  and  are  expelled  by  the  intrusion  of 
passion.  If  found  in  a  passionate  passage,  they  immediately  give 
the  effect  of  a  pause,  an  attempt  at  restraint ;  compare,  in  36.  48. 
54,  the  evident  check  imposed  on  the  current  of  denunciation  by 
the  clauses  beginning  dXXd  [iyjv  or:,  Tjyouiiai  roivuv,  toutwv  Toivuv. 

Although  these  particles  and  deictic  phrases  do  not  belong  to 
emotional  utterance,  their  frequency  seems  hardly  to  stand  in 
inverse  ratio  to  the  predominance  of  the  latter.  A  rough  calcu- 
lation as  to  the  proportion  of  such  expressions  in  each  speech 
yields  the  following  result : 


No.  of  pages 

No.  of  deictic 

Or. 

(Teubner). 

expressions. 

Proportion 

38 

8 

33 

4-125 

36 

lyi 

63 

3.6 

27 

20 

68 

3-4 

31 

4 

13 

3-25 

30 

lOj 

33 

3-14 

29 

17 

50 

2.9 

37 

17 

46 

2.7 

57 

20i 

53 

2.59 

45 

25 

62 

2.48 

41 

Si 

21 

2.47 

39 

Ilj 

26 

2.26 

55 

9i 

19 

2 

54 

14 

27 

1.9 

28 

7 

12 

1.7 

1 


This  would  seem  to  indicate  a  relation  between  these  phrases 
and  the  predominance  or  subordination  of  the  legal  element  in  a 
speech;  for  we  find  at  the  head  of  the  list  Or.  38  (tt^ooc  Naoaifxaxov 
xai  SevoTteid-riv),  which  deals  chiefly  with  a  point  of  law,  Or.  36  (oTtkp 


OF 

S^UFORNAi^ 
21 

0epiiiu)vo<z),  delivered  by  an  advocate,  and  the  lawyer-like  speeches 
of  Demosthenes  himself;  near  the  foot  the  two  orations,  54  and 
55,  especially  marked  by  naweti  and  simplicity  of  tone,  one,  39, 
which  turns  on  no  point  of  law,  and  one,  41,  the  speaker  of  which 
announces  himself  as  a  quiet  citizen,  unaccustomed  to  the  courts  ; 
as  for  Or.  45,  far  more  of  its  considerable  length  is  devoted  to 
vilification  than  to  argument.  One  indeed  of  the  speeches  delivered 
by  the  author,  28  (xara  "Aipo^ou  /?'),  stands  last  on  the  list,  and  it 
is  interesting  to  observe  the  difference  between  this  and  31,  both 
being  epilogues  and  both  full  of  warmth  and  vehemence.  Each 
begins  with  an  argument;  but  the  former  passes  into  summary 
and  appeal,  the  latter  continues  with  argumentative  criticism  of 
the  adversary's  pleas.  That  is  to  say,  Demosthenes,  however 
moved  by  passion,  would  not  argue  without  the  help  of  the 
formulas  which  made  for  lucidity,  while  in  the  recital  of  matters 
already  familiar  to  the  hearers  he  abandoned  himself  to  the  least 
impeded  flow  of  rapid  utterance;  on  the  other  hand  we  see  the 
influence  of  rj^^onoua  and  the  sensitiveness  of  the  artist  in  the 
degree  to  which  this  born  reasoner  subdued  his  tendency  to 
emphatic  and  pointed  demonstration  when  writing  for  such  per- 
sonages as  Ariston  (in  the  speech  against  Conon),  or  for  the 
unnamed  adversaries  of  Spudias  and  Callicles. 

Transitions. 

This  love  of  clearness  is  especially  observable  in  the  careful 
deliberateness  with  which  the  orator  passes  from  one  to  another  of 
the  main  divisions  of  a  speech.  The  transition  from  prooemium  to 
narrative  was  hardly  neglected  even  by  inferior  writers,  since  the 
prooemium  itself  had  a  certain  fixity  of  form,'  but  that  from  narra- 
tive to  argument,  or  any  shift  of  topic,  is,  with  Demosthenes,  habitu- 
ally marked  and  emphasized.  Compare  27.  7,  where  the  passage 
from  the  statement  of  the  case  to  that  concerning  the  amount  of 
the  property  is  elaborately  defined  :  xa\  zd  fiev  x£<pdXaiov  .  .  .  rodr'  ^y 
.  .  .  TO  dk  7tX^y%(;  .  .  .  on  rour'  7]v  x.  t.  X.  Compare  also  the  intro- 
duction of  the  argument  in  29.  10,  45.  7,  57.  17;  the  closing  of  the 
narrative  in  30.9,  36.  18,  37.  17;  the  elaborate  transition  from 
narrative  to  criticism  of  the  adversary's  defense  in  54.  13.  Such 
passages,  which  stand  out  like  seams  in  the  oratorical  web,  at  once 

'Though,  as  will  be  seen  later,  the  difference  in  tone  at  this  point  some- 
times serves  to  distinguish  the  greater  from  the  lesser  artist. 


22 

linking  and  defining  its  different  sections,  are  too  obvious  to  call 
for  much  comment ;  some  curious  exceptions  in  Or.  38  deserve 
more  notice.    The  formal  prooemium  of  that  speech  seems  to  end 
with  the  words  ^o-qd^rjaai  fiot  TO.  dtzata,  found  also  in  other  prooemia 
(27.  3,45.  2,  54,  2),  but  there  followed  by  some  deictic  phrase  intro- 
ductory of  the  narrative.    Here,  on  the  contrary,  there  follows,  as 
if  in  parenthesis,  a  sentence,  explanatory  of  the  words  fxi)  Trpoff-^xov- 
roq  iyxXyjixaro^,  which  would  naturally  be  placed  within  the  pro- 
oemium, as  would  also  the  next  sentence,  ri)v  fih  gov  .  .  .  el'ffsff'&e. 
That  they  are  really  beyond  its  limits,  or,  if  we  like,  that  it  has  no 
definite  limit,  appears  from  the  immediate  introduction  of  the 
testimony  on  which  the  opening  argument  is  to  be  based,  and 
which  takes  the  place  of  a  dtij)rfjfft<: ;  after  having  thus  stated  his 
case  vicariously,  the  speaker  proceeds  to  that  discussion  of  the 
demurrer,  which  is  the  real  body  and  substance  of  the  speech,  and 
this  he  prefaces   by  a  series   of  deictic  phrases  which,  in   their 
nearness  to   the  incomplete  prooemium,  seem  to  stand   for  its 
formal   conclusion.     In  fact  the  prooemium  is  constructed   with 
exceeding  looseness,  and  the  dtijy-qfftq  is,  so  to  speak,  telescoped  into 
it.     Looking  further  at  the  singularly  abrupt  introduction  of  new- 
arguments  in  §23  (ouz  iiiiaf^waav  x,  r.  A.),  and  at  the  **  purple  patch" 
in  §21-22,  which  overweights  the  short  speech  and  is  less  fitly 
placed  than  as  epilogue  to  Or.  37  {jzpo^  TlavrahtTov),  we  may  con- 
jecture that,  in  handling  this  slight  case,  Demosthenes  saved  time 
and  trouble  by  declining  the  labor  of  careful  construction.     The 
imperfections  furnish,  however,  no  good  reason  for  doubting  the 
genuineness  of  the  oration,  which  not  only  has  many  Demos- 
thenic features,  but  is,  even  in  its  scamped  state,  notably  lucid  and 
effective,  and  is  not  to  be  called  inartistic,  but  rather  the  unfinished 
product  of  a  manifest  artist. 

Prooemia. 

Such  careless  dealing  with  the  prooemium  is  the  more  notice- 
able, because  some  of  the  speeches  show  in  precisely  this  part  a 
remarkable  subtlety  and  delicacy  of  finish.  In  the  earliest  orations, 
indeed,  the  introduction  has  only  the  excellence  of  a  severe  correct- 
ness ;  that  of  Or.  27  is  a  simple  captatio  beiievolentiae,  that  of  Or. 
30  a  conflatio  invidiae,  while  these  elements  are  mingled  in  Or. 
29 ;  in  the  two  latter  a  statement  of  the  points  at  issue  is  added 
(29.  5,  30.  4-5).     But  in  turning  to  the  prooemium  of  36  we  find 


I 


23 

ourselves  in  contact  with  a  much  finer  and  more  original  piece  of 
workmanship.  This  compact  little  masterpiece  fulfills  indeed  all 
conventional  purposes  by  exciting  good-will  for  one  party,  preju- 
dice against  the  other,  and  defining  the  points  to  be  proved ;  but 
there  is  no  conventionality  in  the  exquisitely  felicitous  phrasing 
and  the  effect  produced  may  be  compared  to  that  of  an  operatic 
overture,  which  does  not  merely  preface  the  following  composition, 
but  indicates  its  tone  and  character.  The  simple  gravity  of  the 
opening  words  foreshadows  the  fine  impersonal  dignity  which  the 
advocate  maintains  throughout;  the  warmth  and  rapidity  of  the 
sentence  oVa  ydp  Go-/.oipwnil,  with  its  unusual  and  startling  anacolu- 
thon,  breathes  the  spirit  of  all  that  ardent  vituperation  and  lauda- 
tion to  which  so  much  of  the  speech  is  devoted;  and  the  final 
sentence,  i^  ^PvM — axobaavreq^  while  constituting  the  formal  tran- 
sition to  the  narrative,  sums  up  with  noteworthy  sharpness  and 
emphatic  brevity  the  whole  purpose  of  the  speech  in  the  mention 
of  the  two  main  topics — the  point  of  law  (Joq  oux  eiffayatyi/xo':  i)  dUrP) 
and  the  rascality  of  Apollodorus  (rojv  toutou  (Tuxo^avrtav),  A  minor 
delicacy  of  more  mechanical  sort,  but  important  for  purposes  of 
comparison,  lies  in  the  fact  that  stress  is  laid  on  the  object  of  the 
demurrer  (rijv  ijAy  ow — xy^t'a),  while  the  grounds  on  which  it  is  based 
are  only  incidentally  touched  upon.  So  in  Or.  37  the  speaker 
makes  only  an  allusion  to  the  aipeaic,  xai  dnaXXayTj ;  he  first  suggests 
the  character  of  his  defense,  which  will  rest  on  his  own  innocence 
(oddev  ijdtxrjxa  rourov')  and  on  the  illegality  of  the  action  (Tzapd  rdv 
vopLov  X.  T.  f.),  and  then  foreshadows  its  spirit  by  a  vigorous  and 
cutting  denunciation  of  the  audacity  of  Pantaenetus  (2  ei  [xh  oov 
kTZSTZoyf^si  X.  T.  f.  ;  oodk'^  7Jdix7jfi£voq  ....  (Tuxo^a'^TsJ ;  3  noXXaiv  .... 
T£T6Xfj.rjxs'^).  This  introduction,  while  stamped  with  the  same 
character  of  suggestiveness  that  belongs  to  that  of  36,  is  much 
inferior  to  it  in  comprehensiveness  and  neatness ;  admirable,  on 
the  other  hand,  is  the  very  brief  and  closely  woven  prooemium 
of  Or.  45.*  The  suit,  brought  against  Stephanus  for  perjury,  is 
meant  as  an  attack  on  Phormio,  and  the  first  words  betoken  its 
double  nature  :  xazaipeudoiiaprup-q^siq — he  does  not  think  it  worth 

^  I  do  not  wish  to  seem  unduly  to  depreciate  the  admirable  prooemium 
of  Or.  37,  which,  in  its  loftiness  of  tone  and  largeness  of  outline,  well 
balances  the  magnificent  epilogue  of  the  same  speech,  but  lacks  the  pecu- 
liar preluding  quality  and  the  brilliant  condensation  to  which  I  desire  to 
call  attention. 


24 

while  to  say  by  whom,  but  hurries  on  to  the  real  author  of  the 
false  testimony — xal  iza^wv  bizd  ^opixiiDvo<z  b^piarua /.ai  dtvm\  and 
at  the  end  he  repeats  this  double  charge  in  chiastic  form  (tt^'v  r* 
kxtivou  TZOMTipiav  .  .  .  xaX  robrouz  on  to.  (peudrj  [leiiaprop-^xafft)]  while 
between  comes  a  touch  of  Apollodorean  plaintiveness  (^p-iya  yap  roiq 
TiTo-pixoaiv  X.  T.  f.,  cf.  §§57,  85),  and  then  a  summary  of  the  three 
main  points  in  the  denunciation  of  Stephanus — that  he  has  per- 
jured himself,  and  that  for  money,  and  stands  self-convicted  ;  this 
put  with  the  most  vigorous  bare  curtness  in  swift  participial  con- 
struction and  clinched  with  an  asyndetic  phrase  which  is  rendered 
doubly  emphatic  by  its  unusual  position  in  the  very  beginning  of 
the  speech.  A  similar  initial  sharpness  of  suggestion  appears  in 
the  first  word  of  Or.  54,  ulSpKn^scc;  for  the  plaintiff,  who  brings  a 
charge  only  of  aut'a,  regards  Conon  as  guilty  of  o^ptq,  and  this 
conception  he  enforces  upon  the  judges  from  the  start,  and  justi- 
fies by  the  words  immediately  following,  xat  Tcai^tbu  .  . .  7T£pi<peu^£(Ti^ai 
pe,  which  are  significant  in  their  simplicity ;  they  tell  nothing  of  the 
manner  of  the  offense,  which  is  here  immaterial,  but  reveal  in  full 
its  consequences  to  serve  as  pendant  and  righteous  apology  to  the 
utterance  fjdcffz'  uv  d-a'^druo  xpbaq  TouTuv.  Here  the  note  is  struck 
which  is  to  dominate  the  whole;  so,  too,  in  55.  i,  where  the  plain- 
tive reflection,  obx  ^v  .  .  .  ru^slu,  harmonizes  with  the  naive  and 
expostulatory  tone  of  the  speech,  and  at  the  same  time  gives  with 
refreshing  novelty  of  form  the  common  disclaimer  of  litigiousness^ 
Then  follows  a  brief  recital  of  facts  to  support  the  accusation  con- 
tained in  the  words  rur^rjpov  xa\  TzXeouixTou  ;  and  the  transition  to  the 
narrative  is  made  by  an  appeal  which  reflects  the  diffident  modesty 
of  the  speaker  in  the  words  ou^/ — eiTzslv,  and  his  strong  sense  of 
injury  in  the  final,  and  therefore  more  emphatic,  ^avspcbq  ffuxutpav- 

TOUpLat, 

In  the  rough-hewn  prooemium  of  38,  the  only  point  to  be  espe- 
cially noted  is,  that  here,  as  in  36  and  37,  the  argument  on  the 
Tzapaypaipri  is  not  anticipated.  That  of  41  has  a  touch  of  sug- 
gestive quality  in  the  opening  words  {ri^elcpaq  h^^opsv  S)  a.  d.  yovai- 
xaq  X.  T.  i.),  which  establish  a  reason  for  the  reserve  that  char- 
acterizes the  speaker's  language,  while  the  quiet  simplicity  of  the 
whole  passage  agrees  with  the  unemphatic  tone  of  the  short 
speech;  thus  the  concluding  words  of  the  prologue  (^opwq  x.  r.  f.) 
and  those  of  the  epilogue  (§307?^.)  are  alike  singularly  untinged 
with  the  pathos  habitual  in  such  appeals.     In  the  prooemium  of 


25 

39  a  narrative  is  smoothly  interwoven  with  the  deprecatio  invidiae 
which  constitutes  its  essential  purport  (cf.  §i  obdsiua  cpdoTzpay- 
fioffuvT) ;  §6,  oox  ooroj  (Txaioq) ;  this  exceptional  arrangement  is  both 
logical  and  artistically  effective,  inasmuch  as  the  events  narrated, 
while  yielding  excellent  ground  for  the  assertion  that  the  plaintiff 
is  not  actuated  by  a  spirit  of  mere  perversity,  do  not  form  the 
subject  of  the  argumentation,  that  is,  do  not  correspond  to  a  real 
dtrjyqatq  in  the  strict  sense  of  that  term.  The  character  of  the 
whole  is  slightly  foreshadowed  in  the  absence  of  comment  on  the 
methods  by  which  the  adoption  was  brought  about,  in  the  stress 
laid  on  the  speaker's  fulfilment  of  all  legal  claims  (§6  rd  rpirov 
^£iixaff{^at.  [lipoq)^  and  in  the  cumulative  asyndeton  in  §4  {tlGriyaY\ 
iTTotTjffaro  .  .  .  lYYpd<pei)^  a  figure  especially  frequent  in  this  speech 
and  here  affording  a  brief  hint  of  the  rapidity  and  warmth  which 
are  to  prevail  throughout.  Finally,  the  unusually  long  prooemium 
of  57  is  the  speech  in  miniature,  a  pathetic  and  anxious  app<  al 
with  flashes  of  vehemence  cautiously  restrained ;  anticipatory  of 
the  whole  in  manner,  not  in  matter,  since  here  the  appeal  is  based 
on  general  considerations  proper  to  the  partly  public  sphere  of 
the  case. 

II. — Comparison  with  Lysias  and  Isaeus. 

It  need  hardly  be  said  that  none  of  the  figures  or  phrases  which 
have  been  reviewed  is,  any  more  than  the  prooemium  itself,  the 
exclusive  property  of  Demosthenes;  it  is  only  the  manner  of 
handling  the  common  material  that  reveals  the  orator's  tempera- 
ment and  artistic  power.  A  brief  comparison  with  the  usages  of 
his  two  chief  predecessors  in  forensic  oratory,  Lysias  and  Isaeus, 
may  enable  us  more  clearly  to  define  his  individuality  and  more 
easily  to  discover  or  deny  its  presence  in  compositions  of  doubtful 
authorship.  In  studying  Lysias  I  have  left  out  of  consideration 
not  only  the  orations  marked  as  spurious  by  Scheibe  (2,  6,  15,  20), 
but  also  Orr.  8,  11,  33,  and  34.  The  first  and  third  of  these  are 
epideictic;  the  second  is,  as  Scheibe  remarks,  an  epitome  of  10; 
the  last  is  a  mere  fragment.  This  is  true  indeed  of  several 
speeches  included  in  my  study,  but  they  at  least  belong  to  the 
judicial  sphere,  while  the  speech  on  the  constitution  is  deliberative. 
The  comparison  with  Lysias  is  in  any  case  less  exact  than  that 
with  Isaeus,  as  only  a  few  of  the  former's  extant  speeches  (10,  17, 
23,  32)  belong  to  the  class  of  idtionxot. 


26 

Denunciation. 

The  denunciatory  epithets  employed  not  infrequently  by  Isaeus 
have  much  the  same  range  and  tone  as  the  Demosthenean  :  avai- 
ai^roq,  -£«,  -efv,  I.  8.  26.  47,  3.  35.  40.  72,  6.  54,  8.  13.  40,  II.  14  ) 
w^atdijq,  -eta,  I.  2.  7,  2.  28,  3.  18.  67,  4.  19,  6.  I3.  43.  46,  7.  21.  23, 
II.  6;  7rov9y/)o?-,  -£a  3.  39.  40,  5.  13.  35,  6.  55,  II.  20;  aiffxpoxipdeta 
I.  8  ;  fitapia  5.  II  ;  dduia  5.  31  ;  rrXsoue^ca  8.  2,  II.  36 ;  d\^6(noq  4.  19  ; 
(T^^irhoq  II.  6  ;  under  the  same  head  may  be  brought  (ptXo^p-qixareJv 
10.  17.  Words  of  this  class  are  wanting  in  Or.  12,  a  fragment 
devoid  of  all  rhetorical  coloring,  and  in  Or.  9,  where  their 
absence  might  be  attributed  to  rji3-o7totia,  if  the  sympathetic  plas- 
ticity which  this  word  implies  could  be  otherwise  discovered  in 
the  somewhat  uniform  and  rigid  style  of  Isaeus.  He  may  in  this 
case  have  exercised  a  reserve  imposed  by  the  position  or  character 
of  his  client,  but  the  latter's  personality  is  not  otherwise  felt,  and 
the  absence  of  vituperation  fails  therefore  to  have,  as  with  Demos- 
thenes, a  distinct  stylistic  effect.'  The  sphere  of  the  Lysianic 
speeches  seems  in  general  to  render  a  detailed  comparison  on 
this  point  superfluous ;  in  those  which  enter  into  consideration  we 
find  xaxia  §10.  28,  avatffywria  §32.  20,  izovTjpta  ib.  §23.  In  Or.  3, 
which  Dionysius  compares  with  the  speech  against  Conon  (Dem. 
54),  Tzovripia  occurs  twice,  §9.  44,  in  neither  case  with  strong 
emphasis ;  Ttavodpyoq  ib.  44  is  quite  indirect. 

Deictic  Expressions. 

Of  deictic  words  and  phrases,  which  are  frequent  in  both  orators, 
little  need  be  said ;  their  proportion  seems  to  be  highest  in 
Demosthenes,  lowest  in  Isaeus,  and  to  vary  most  in  the  different 
speeches  of  Lysias.  The  ratio  oiroho\>  to  pe)/  oo^^  is  much  higher 
in  Demosthenes  than  in  his  two  predecessors,  the  figures  being  : 


Lys. 

Isae. 

Dem, 

Toiuov 

I2I=.6 

77  =.66 

180  =  .83 

pkv  ovv 

80=1.4 

40  =  .34 

36  =  . 17 

^  The  remarks  of  Moy,  Plaidoyers  rf'/j/<f  VIII,  do  not  tell  against  this 
view.  It  is  true  that  Isaeus  does  not  "  make  little  fishes  talk  like  whales  "j 
but  the  subtle  reflection  of  another's  character  in  his  own  style,  the  high 
dramatic  perfection  of  ^-^oTroua  achieved  by  Demosthenes  and  by  Lysias, 
were  beyond  his  reach. 


27 

Apostrophe. 

Lysias  uses  apostrophe  in  a  lew  orations  with  telling  effect ;  cf. 
ID.  8-IO.  12-14.  16.  17.  18,  13.  48.  58-9.  61.  75.  87,  30.  5.  17.  19; 
also  26.  I,  where  the  mutilation  of  the  speech  leaves  the  precise 
force  of  the  apostrophe  uncertain.  It  is  to  be  observed  that,  in 
the  first  examples  cited  from  10,  the  apostrophe,  while  externally 
argumentative,  becomes  ironical  through  the  fact  that  the  argu- 
ment turns  on  a  hypothetical  instance  of  the  cowardice  with  which 
the  adversary  is  slyly  taunted  throughout.  In  7.  20-22  the  figure 
is  argumentative  and  expostulatory,  as  in  Dem.  55,  and  with  the 
same  justification.  That  Lysias  should  have  used  so  rarely  a 
form  of  speech,  the  capabilities  of  which  he  so  well  understood, 
may  doubtless  be  explained  in  large  part  from  the  circumstances 
attending  each  particular  oration ;  but  it  must  also  be  borne  in 
mind  that  the  apostrophe  is  essentially  and  pre-eminently  aggres- 
sive, while  persuasiveness  is  the  dominant  quality  in  the  graceful 
eloquence  of  Lysias.  Isaeus  employs  this  figure  only  in  four  of 
his  twelve  speeches.  The  long  apostrophic  denunciation  in  5.43-7 
recalls  some  passages  in  Dem.  36  and  45,  but  is  artistically  less 
satisfactory  because  carried  to  the  end  of  the  speech,  instead  of 
being  relieved  by  a  final  address  to  the  judges.  The  sharp,  brief 
turn  in  6.  54  is  quite  Demosthenic  ;  and  the  expostulation  with  the 
witness  (who  is  an  uncle  of  the  speaker)  in  9.  23  exhibits  an 
effective  use  of  the  apostrophe  of  a  kind  not  to  be  paralleled  from 
Demosthenes  or  Lysias.  The  remaining  passages  (3.  40-41. 
45-6.  48-9,  6.  25-6)  show  a  decided  weakness  of  treatment;  apos- 
trophe and  interrogation  combined  are  made,  what  Demosthenes 
rarely  permits  either  to  become,  the  vehicle  of  argument.  This 
is  comprehensible  enough  in  a  writer  whose  strength  lay  in  argu- 
mentation, and  who  evidently  possessed  rather  a  technical  com- 
mand of  tropes  than  a  natural  or  artistic  leaning  toward  tropical 
expression;  but  it  helps  to  mark  the  far  lower  level  of  art  on 
which  this  trained  advocate  stood  as  compared  with  the  literary 
craftsman  who  preceded,  or  with  the  great  statesman  who  followed, 

him. 

Interrogation, 

Interrogation  occurs  in  most  of  the  Lysianic  orations  (not  in  5, 
17,  23,  28)  and  abounds  in  the  Isaean;  but  the  two  livelier  forms, 
the  challenge  and  the  suggestion,  are  infrequent  with  both  writers. 
Lysias  has  two  examples  of  each  in  two  speeches  :  the  challenge 


28 

in  4.  5.  19,  the  suggestion  in  13.  20.  64.  These  turns  of  speech 
have  an  abrupt  resilient  quality  that  does  not  perfectly  accord 
with  the  continuous,  easy  flow  of  his  style ;  and  we  may  account 
in  like  manner  for  the  fact  that  the  rhetorical  answer,  which  he 
employs  rather  more  frequently,  exhibits  only  in  two  instances 
the  asyndetic  form  preferred  by  Demosthenes ;  so  13.  74,  31.  28; 
with  r^p  3.  36,  4.  7.  19,  26.  7;  with  dUd  4.  5,  19.  38-9.  The 
failure  of  Isaeus  to  employ  the  challenge  (found  only  in  5.  43) 
may  be  ascribed  to  the  unimaginative  and  essentially  argumenta- 
tive nature  of  his  oratory,  which  does  not  easily  rise  to  dramatic 
effects ;  it  is  more  surprising  to  find  the  suggestive  question  only 
in  four  speeches  (5.  13,  6.  36.  63,  8.  9,  11.  11.  32.  34).  No  doubt, 
the  very  vividness  of  this  figure  prevented  him  from  using  it 
more  lavishly ;  his  close,  coherent  style  holds,  but  does  not  arrest, 
the  attention.  Of  the  rhetorical  answer,  on  the  other  hand, 
which  is  simply  a  form  of  emphasis,  Isaeus  furnishes  not  a  few 
examples,  usually  in  asyndeton  (i.  29,  2.  22.  39,  3.  25.  34.  37.  39. 
48.  49.  51.  66,  7.  32,  8.  II.  28,  9.  31,  10.  17,  II.  12.  19.  26)  ;  it  is 
curious  to  observe  how  many  of  these  occur  in  Or.  3  and  with 
what  similarity  of  phrasing  ;  thus  §25.  39.  49  val  /j.d  Aia^  et  rjv 
dXyji%q  TO  izpdyfia  ;  §48  v^  AC  ei  rjv  aX-qd^rj ',  §34,  tzoXo  ye  fidXcffr*  d>,  ei 
^v  dXrji^eq  to  Tzpdy/jLa. 

Irony. 

Irony  is  not  a  habit  with  Isaeus ;  the  sharp  utterances  in  5.  40 
(riyv  obaiav^  if^  r  vDv  i'Tzi  XapL-npoq^  dkXorpiav')  and  II.  4  (^iirsidi]  detvoq 
el  dia^dXXetv  xat  tou<;  v6[xooq  dta(TTpi<peiv)  are  isolated  instances  of  a 
really  vigorous  use  of  this  figure.  A  few  fainter  touches  occur  in 
2.  21  (rou  (pdffyur^Toi;  to  <ppovt~iv'),  3.  29  (doxel  dv  Ofilv  x.  r.  f.),  ib.  70 
(<2»  'yaH)  ;  in  5.  I  the  repetition  of  the  proper  name  conveys  not 
sarcasm,  but  reprobation.  Lysias,  with  his  lively,  flexible  intel- 
lect, has  a  larger  command  of  ironical  expression ;  but  the  Lysi- 
anic  irony  is  neither  as  constant  as  the  Demosthenic,  nor  has  it 
equal  range  or  weight.  One  speech  indeed  (10,  xard  Oeo/xvrjfrrou  a) 
is  conceived  almost  throughout  in  this  spirit ;  the  defendant  had 
before  been  accused  of  cowardice  in  battle,  and  around  this  charge 
the  speaker  plays  with  clever  insinuation  ;  especially  neat  are  the 
turns  in  §11  Qj.S[xeXir-qxaq — Xiyeiv  ;  ^^ijpxei — rijv  dffTrida),  §22  {aoToi^ 
8e  adxyaq  rijv  d<nzi8a),  §23  {dXX^  on  dTtofte^Xrjxux;  rd  onXa).  The 
words  <pauXou  ydp — 7^you/j.rjv  in  §2  have  an  ingenious  doubleness 


29 

of  meaning;  they  may  signify  either  the  contemptible  nature  of 
such  an  imputation  or  the  slight  value  to  be  set  on  such  a  life  as 
that  of  the  father  of  Theomnestus,  and  the  latter  sense  is  brought 
out  by  the  praise  of  the  speaker's  own  father  in  §3  (^ourw  tzoXXov 
di^ioo).  At  other  moments  the  character  attributed  to  Theom- 
nestus stirs  the  accuser  into  frank  indignation  (§13-14,  28-9) ; 
just  as  the  tone  of  sarcastic  bonhomie  in  §11  {oozoq  di  fun  doxei 
X.  T.  i.),  and  in  the  explanation  of  the  legal  phraseology  §16,  17, 
18,  varies  with  that  of  indignant  superiority  in  §20  (jutdripouc; — 
dr)X<i)ffet  df)  and  §23  {obx  av  auroq  d^id)<je(.ev) ;  but  the  general  im- 
pression is  one  of  feline  mischievousness,  and  we  feel  that  the 
taunts  under  which  Theomnestus  may  have  winced  must  have 
provoked  laughter  from  the  judges.  The  paradox  in  §26  {axob- 
Gavza  xaxwq  rd  TTpoffijxovTa)  is  very  neat  in  its  brevity  and  shows  a 
characteristic  lightness  of  touch;  cf.  7.  23  (ou  yap — fiapTbpiov)^ 
12.  27  (oy  ydp—iXdfj.^avov\  32.  22  (jpdp.[iaTa — dvri  ^pTj/jAzajv).  In 
12.  7  (dTToxTt^vuvat — iTTotouvTo')  the  collocatlou  of  ideas,  in  12.  86 
(i^ouXofjLTjv — dTzoXXovat)  the  contrast,  yields  an  ironic  flavor ;  in  30. 
17  the  brief  apostrophe  and  rapid  return  to  the  judges  impart  a 
sarcastic  coloring  to  the  argument.  Coarser  and  more  obvious 
are  the  brief  sneers  in  24.  3  (W  robroo  dwiffw)^  ib.  21  (raiv  oiioiwq 
Tobro)  <pabXu)v'),  ib.  27  (jwv  6fioiw)/  abro))  and  the  sarcasms  in  13.  44 
("v'  eidTize  x.  z.  f.),  30.  7  {zobziov — Xoidopoixnv).  There  is  a  curious 
obscurity  in  12.  63  {xaizoi  a<p6dp^  dv  x.  z.  f .) ;  and  this,  like  the 
extreme  brevity  of  the  implication  ib.  7  (where  the  one  word 
p-zzoixoiq  involves  the  idea  of  the  citizens  and  the  wrongs  done  to 
them  by  Eratosthenes),  is  akin  to  an  allusive  tendency  which 
appears,  apart  from  irony,  in  some  Lysianic  passages,  as  9.  5 
{Xiyovzsq — hdrjixoir^,  ID.  24  (rj'i?  dv  obx  kXsijaeis  Aiu\'b(Tio>');  and  SO  the 
indirectness  of  16.  19  (ttoAAo) — eipyaffp.ivot)  is  to  be  contrasted  with 
the  distinctness  of  Dem.  37.  52  and  45.  77,  where  the  speakers  are 
made  to  dwell  more  frankly  on  their  personal  disadvantages.  No 
doubt,  Lysias  could  count  on  being  understood  ;  but  this  very 
inclination  to  rely  on  the  comprehension  of  his  hearers  recalls  the 
fact  that  he  trained  himself  in  writing  not  for  the  public,  but  for  a 
small  circle  of  admirers,  such  as  Plato's  Phaedrus  shows  gathered 
aoout  him,  while  the  insistent  clearness  of  Isaeus  and  Demosthenes 
suggests  the  larger  and  more  varied  audience  of  the  law  courts.  It 
is  in  part  this  divergence  in  their  early  surroundings  that  explains 
for  us  the  difference  between  the  irony  of  Lysias  and  that  of 


30 

Demosthenes  ;  the  former  was  accustomed  to  amuse  and  delight 
applauding  friends  by  easy  insinuating  dexterities  of  speech ;  for 
the  latter,  reared  in  an  atmosphere  of  combat,  the  most  finished 
utterance  was  never  without  a  certain  grim  earnestness  of  inten- 
tion. Of  course,  character  must  also  be  taken  into  account,  and 
here  the  element  of  i^{^o7zoua^  as  exhibited  in  each  orator,  comes 
into  consideration.  Even  when  he  wrote  for  others  to  speak,  the 
language  of  Demosthenes  was  necessarily  ironical,  lofty,  incisive ; 
his  powerful  nature  absorbed  and  transmuted  the  personality 
with  which  it  had  to  become  identified.  Lysias  exhibits  greater 
diversities  of  tone  and  attitude  ;  like  irony,  other  qualities,  found 
in  one  oration,  are  absent  from  another,  and  sometimes  his  com- 
positions rise  above  mediocrity  by  talent  only,  not  by  force  of 
character ;  the  plasticity  of  his  nature  expressed  itself  in  his  cling- 
ing style,  that  rarest  of  styles,  which,  like  an  elastic  and  trans- 
parent mask,  reveals  indifferently  the  native  features,  or  the 
grimaces,  of  all  who  borrow  it,  from  the  pensioner  to  the  patriot. 

Repetition. 

In  dealing  with  repetition  in  Isaeus  and  Lysias  it  is  necessary 
to  distinguish  the  rhetorical  figure  from  a  mere  reiteration  without 
rhetorical  effect.  This  last  is,  as  Blass  observes  (II  502),  a 
tendency  with  the  former  orator ;  cf.  6.  50,  where  the  words  tldi 
yvrjfftot  are  twice  repeated  with  a  certain  awkwardness  of  distinct- 
ness. In  Lysias  this  apparently  artless  reiteration  appears  a  part 
of  that  studied  simplicity  on  which  Dionysius  remarks  (de  Lys,  8)  ; 
so  in  I.  17  {jzavra  [loo — ()7:o(piaq).  In  a  comparison  intended  to 
show  the  artistic  use  of  the  figure  in  the  three  orators  it  seems 
reasonable  to  set  aside  not  only  such  cases,  but  also  those  in  which 
a  word  used  in  anaphora  is  inevitable  and  therefore  unemphatic,  as 
is  the  case  with  6Va,  Dem.  36.  38,  and  aV,  Dem,  37.  36.  37,  and  to 
confine  ourselves  to  the  most  regular  or  most  emphatic  forms.  Of 
these  Lysias  has  four :  anaphora  with  [ih — di  (7.  41,  10.  27,  12.  19. 
21.  76.  77.  78.  94,  13.  I.  44,  16.  8,  18.  3,  19.  9.  62,  21.  25,  23.  11), 
asyndetic  anaphora  (3.  46,  14.  6),  epanadiplosis  (13.  93,  31.  22), 
xuxkoq  (4.  16).  Isaeus  exhibits  a  greater  variety;  anaphora  with 
fxev — di  (5.  9.  20,  6.  43,  II.  9.  10),  asyndetic  anaphora  (8.  14,  11.  6. 
35),  epanadiplosis  (11.  35  bis),  (juinckox-q  (5.  25,  6.  53),  x6zAo<r  (5.  46), 
anastrophe  (8.  17).  The  number  of  occurrences  and  proportion 
per  Teubner  page  for  the  three  orators  are  : 


31 


Lys. 

Isae. 

Dem, 

anaphora  with  ixh — di  : 

i6 

5 

12 

asyndetic  anaphora: 

2 

3 

6 

epanadiplosis : 

2 

2 

7 

<tu/jl7lXoxij  : 

... 

2 

3 

xoxXoq : 

I 

I 

I 

anastrophe : 

... 

I 

4 

antistrophe: 

... 

... 

2 

2i  =  .ii4    i4  =  .ioi    35  =  . 185 

Of  the  Lysianic  instances  four-fifths  belong  to  the  first  class, 
the  weakest  and  least  rhetorical  of  all;  and  it  is  noticeable  that  in 
his  two  cases  of  epanadiplosis  the  natural  sharpness  of  the  figure 
is  softened  by  the  wide  interval  at  which  the  word  is  repeated — 
an  effect  found  also  in  §13  of  the  speech  against  Conon,  which 
approaches  nearer  to  the  Lysianic  style  than  any  other  Demos- 
thenic oration  except  that  against  Callicles.  And  if  Demosthenes 
uses  stronger  repetitions  than  does  Lysias,  he  employs  these 
strong  forms  with  more  variety*  and  force  than  does  Isaeus.  His 
ffu/xTzXoxyj  is  more  massive ;  his  asyndetic  anaphora  is  often  com- 
bined with  interrogation  ;  and  his  language  is  sometimes  colored 
by  a  warmth  of  feeling  which  lends  greater  weight  to  repetition. 
This  is  noticeably  the  case  in  28.  20,  where  the  epanadiplosis 
marks  the  rise  of  passion  and  is  followed  by  a  wonderful  series  of 
short  asyndetic  clauses,  two  of  which,  (Tdxrar'  iXeyjffare:  and  Uereuu) 
dvTt^oXo),  represent  a  variant  form  of  epanadiplosis.  Moreover,  the 
habitual  care  with  which  Demosthenes  varied  his  phrase,  avoiding 
alike  the  naive  iterations  of  Lysias  and  the  loose  usage  of  Isaeus, 
throws  into  relief  the  distinct  rhetorical  purpose  of  his  repetitions  ; 
they  acquire  artistic  finish  and  significance  from  their  setting,  no 
less  than  from  their  form.  It  is  difficult  to  attribute  to  Lysias  any 
lack  of  artistic  power  ;  and  an  example  of  asyndetic  anaphora  not 
cited  above  (32.  16)  shows  how  well  he  understood  its  value  for 
the  expression  of  feeling.  But  that  vehement  sentence  is  not  an 
integral  part  of  the  oration  in  which  it  occurs  ;  it  is  quoted,  or 
rather  professes  to  be  quoted,  from  the  excited  utterance  of  a 
grieved  and  angry  woman.  For  this  reason  I  have  not  chosen  to 
count  it  as  an  example  of  Lysianic  repetition ;  it  shows  what  the 
orator  could  do,  and,  by  its  position,  what  he  habitually  refrained 
from  doing.     The  high  fervor  and  dramatic  pitch  which  Demos- 


32 

thenes  brought  upon  the  tribune  Lysias  found  inappropriate,  save 
when  excused  by  the  device  of  dramatization. 

Asyndeton. 

To  discuss  at  length  the  employment  of  asyndeton  in  the  three 
orators  would  be  too  large  a  task  for  the  limits  of  this  paper ;  a 
few  observations  will  serve  to  indicate  the  development,  extensive 
and  intensive,  which  this  construction  received  at  the  hands  of 
Demosthenes.  In  the  proportional  number  of  occurrences  we  find 
a  steady  increase  from  Lysias  through  Isaeus  to  Demosthenes, 
the  figures  being : 

Lys.  128  =  0.7  per  Teub.  p.      Isae.  142=1.0      Dem.  302=  1.6 

A  singularly  regular  progression  appears  in  the  introduction 
of  documents  or  testimony,  where  asyndeton  in  the  summons  to 
the  clerk  or  witness  gives  an  effect  of  sharpness  and  eagerness. 
The  total  number  of  such  commands,  the  instances  of  asyndeton, 
and  the  proportion  of  these  to  the  whole,  are : 

Lys.  65:4  =  . 06       Isae.  83  :  io  =  .i2      Dem.  129:  31  =1.24 

In  the  use  of  the  weightiest  form  of  asyndeton,  the  cumulative, 
Demosthenes  exhibits  a  much  greater  advance  on  his  prede- 
cessors : 

Lys.  4  =  .02  per  Teub.  p.      Isae.  12  =  .08      Dem.  43  =  .2 

Demosthenes  employs  asyndeton  freely  in  emotional  passages. 
Especially  characteristic  are  the  following  abrupt  utterances : 
a'l^cov  ye  28.  6;  oux  eta  ixifff^oov  28.  7^;  ob  Ttpdrspov  31.  12;  op<f<^ 
TOW  'A,  36.  50;  (h  jSiXziffT*  ib.  52;  oux  TJdixoo  ib.  54;  dp^wq  y'  u)  11. 
37.  26;  ^tt'  kxeivotq  38.  27;  olda  xayd)  39.  12;  Tzaoaai  iih  and  oudslq 
cLTzeXaovei  ib.  34 ;  Tzovfjpdq  w.  a.  'A.  45.  80.  Somewhat  similar  are,  in 
Isaeus,  the  brusque  ipwrijauj  ae  u.  5,  oux  a^iov  ib.  47;  but  in  gen- 
eral this  orator  uses  asyndeton  chiefly  for  the  sake  of  emphasis. 
Characteristically  Lysianic  is  its  use  in  transitions  or  in  a  simple 
continuation  of  the  narrative  or  argument;  so  i(Tta)7:(ov  iyco  i.  14; 
wfioXoysc  raora  Tzotelu  ib.  22  ;  iyioy^  av  auiffov  4.  17  ;  7toX?Aq  ay  7.  14 
(where  it  is  unnecessary  to  assume  a  lacuna,  as  is  done  by  Scheibe 

^The  introductory  clause  preceding  distinguishes  this  passage  from  the 
similar  one  in  38.  23,  which  seemed  to  suggest  that  that  oration  had  not 
been  carefully  worked  out.  An  asyndetic  transition  from  one  topic  to 
another  is  not  characteristic  of  the  finished  work  of  Demosthenes. 


33       • 

and  by  some  other  critics);  a>  [ih  TpoTzuj  9.  13;  obx  eyu)  18.  24; 
Ttpoffi'/oufTc  Tov  voov  30.  2^, ',  T^oXo  S.V  ^Tj  32.  II.  SucH  lostances  are 
rare  in  Demosthenes :  ovroq  eXafie  4i«  35  ^''^^vov  ixdffzo^'  54.  3;  ttoAA' 
av  einsiv  ib.  44  (at  the  beginning  of  a  brief  epilogue ;  of.  Lys.  31. 
34)  ;   TToXXd   dooXtxd  57.  45  ;   and   SO   Isaeus    10,  22  tooto  fih  old'  ore. 

The  tendency  of  Demosthenes  to  employ  asyndeton  in  connec- 
tion with  warmth  of  tone  is  further  indicated  by  his  comparatively 
rare  use  of  it  in  the  quiet  beginning  of  a  narrative.  The  dnjyyjfftq 
is  introduced  by  an  asyndetic  sentence  in  Lysias  four  times  (9.  4, 
12.  4,  17.  2,  32.  4),  in  Demosthenes  twice  (37.  4,  54.  3);  in  a 
secondary  narrative  it  occurs  twice  in  Lysias  (i.  22,  13.  55),  twice 
in  Demosthenes  (38.  12,  57.  41).  Isaeus  has  it  in  secondary  narra- 
tive 6.  19,  where  two  asyndetic  sentences  occur  in  succession  ;  in 
10.  4  the  dtijyiqfftq  is  introduced  with  ydp,  and  then  follows  an  asyn- 
detic continuation,  ooroq  k'Xaj^s  ;  this  is  the  case  also  in  Dem.  41.  3. 
Noteworthy  is  the  triple  asyndeton  '  in  Isae.  7. 5,  following  on  the 
introduction  with  ydp;  contrast  Dem.  54.  3,  where  a  sentence  with 
oov  is  placed  between  the  two  asyndeta. 

A  not  uncommon  use  of  this  construction  is  in  clauses  intro- 
duced by  a  demonstrative  which  contain  a  comment  on  or  an 
explanation  or  resumption  of  what  has  just  preceded.  I  do  not 
refer  here  to  the  occurrence  of  such  cases  after  documents  or  testi- 
mony, which  is  in  general  one  of  the  weakest  forms  of  asyndeton, 
though  its  possible  vigor  in  mass  may  be  seen  from  Dem.  28. 
11-13.  Where  these  clauses  break  the  flow  of  the  speech,  they 
have  usually,  in  Demosthenes,  a  warmth  of  tone  which  is  less  often 
to  be  felt  in  the  other  orators.     Cf. 

Lys.  I.  2.  17,  3.  13,  4.  II.  16,  9.  7,  13.  26.  31.  60.  71.  79.  81,  23.  9, 
26.  20,  32.  21 ;  with  warmth  10.  28,  12.  20.  84,  13.  47. 

Isae.  I.  10,  2.  20.  21,  3.  67,  5.  10,  7.  9.  16.  28.  45  dis,  8.  24,  11.  3. 
42.  43;  with  warmth  2.  23.  37,  3.  23  dis,  5.  11,  7.  21.  23. 

Dem.  27. 9,  29.  10,  30.  6.  14,  37.  36,  55.  25 ;  with  warmth  27.  25. 
31,  30.  8.  24  dis.  38,  37.  41,  45.  2,  57.  65. 

ilsae.  6.  19  and  7.  5  are  not  to  be  regarded  as  instances  of  cumulative 
asyndeton  ;  this  term  is  meant  to  include  only  those  cases  in  which  the 
asyndetic  clauses  are  intimately  connected,  embodying  essentially  one  idea 
and  conveying  an  impression  of  rapidity.  So  in  Dem.  28.  20  we  have  not 
one  instance,  but  four,  of  cumulative  asyndeton  :  cuaar''  e?ier/oaT£,  Iketevu 
dvTijSoTiUj  TTpoQ — v[uv,  ovTug — fie.  The  pauses  after  rjleTjaav,  Tre(pev-ya/uev,  v/x'iv 
are  strongly  felt  J  they  represent  the  catch  in  the  breath,  the  breaking  of 
the  voice  between  these  rapid  utterances  of  passion. 


34 

The  number  of  instances  in  each  class  is  therefore  : 

Lys.  15  : 4,  Isae.  14 :  7,  Dem.  6  :  9. 

It  appears  then  that  this  kind  of  asyndeton  is  used  more  fre- 
quently by  the  two  earlier  orators  than  by  Demosthenes,  and  that 
the  latter  oftener  infuses  into  it  a  tone  of  strong  feeling. 

Of  the  prooemium  in  Lysias  and  Isaeus  there  is  nothing  to  be 
said,  save  that  neither  orator  anywhere  exhibits  that  intense  cul- 
tivation and  exquisite  finish  of  this  part  of  the  speech  which  were 
found  in  some  orations  of  Demosthenes. 


III. — Examination  of  Suspected  Speeches. 

The  fact  that  this  paper  originated  in  a  study'  of  Or.  34  led 
naturally  to  an  examination  of  the  other  speeches  dealing  with 
questions  of  marine  insurance;  to  these  I  have  added  Orr.  40  and 
46  on  account  of  their  close  connection  with  39  and  45,  respect- 
ively. 

Or.  32. — Sch'afer  finds  the  speech  against  Zenothemis  Demos- 
thenic neither  in  composition  nor  in  tone ;  Blass  rejects  it  only 
for  faults  in  method  and  argument.  One  of  these  lies  in  the  fact 
that  the  demurrer  is  argued  out  in  the  prooemium ;  what  has  been 
said  above  concerning  Orr.  36  and  37  shows  that  this  anticipation 
is  not  Demosthenean.  As  the  prooemium  is  faulty  in  substance, 
so  in  form  it  displays  no  delicacy  of  finish  ;  and  the  concluding 
words  have  a  tone  not  to  be  paralleled  from  Demosthenes.  The 
speaker,  after  making  the  customary  appeal  for  a  fair  hearing, 
says :  dxouaea&s  yap  dvT&pcuTZou  roXfiav  xat  -Ttovrjpiav  ov  rijv  ru^ouffav, 
avTreo  iycb  to.  -Keitpayiiiv^  avrio  Tzpbq  6/id(;  TzokXdxtq  elnelv  dwrif^a>. 
olfxac  di.  The  power  of  demonstration  is  always  put  by  Demos- 
thenes as  a  thing  to  be  attempted  (7t£cpd<To/j.at  dtddffxstv  27.  3,  30.  5, 
slTtelv  TT.  31.  3,  36.  3,  45.  2,  TT.  del^ai  57.  i)  and  he  expresses  confi- 
dence only  in  the  convincing  force  of  facts  (29.  i  ix  8k  rouriuv 
olfiat — soyvwffTov  effea^ai  ;  ib.  5  ourcjq  fisydloiq — kXiyy^otq — axrd''' — 
e'tffeax^ac  ;  so  30.  5  ;  36.  3  ^^  abrBv  rdJv  -nsTtpayiiivwv  efff£(7f9e  ;  so  55.  3; 
54.2  (ruyyv(o/j.7]v  e'^er'  eu  old'  ort — kizs-iddv — dxoba-qzs)]  nowhere  does 
he  permit  himself,  or  his  client,  such  a  touch  of  brusque  arrogance 
as  that  which  here  offends  good  taste  and  strikes  an  inartistic  note. 

There  is  a  fair  proportion  of  deictic  expressions  (2.  6);  the  effec- 
tive employment  of  the  apostrophe  in  §28-30  recalls  Dem.  37.  57  ; 

*  Published  in  the  Johns  Hopkins  University  Circular,  No.  109,  Feb.  1894. 


35 

the  denunciatory  words  Tzovr^pia  (§2.  3)  and  wmidsta  (§9)  are  used 
with  directness.  Among-  other  forms  of  interrogation  the  sugges- 
tion occurs  once  (§10),  the  challenge  once  (§27);  but  the  rhetorical 
answer,  in  the  vigorous  form  which  sways  opinion,  is  not  found. 
The  total  absence  of  repetition  seems  significant ;  still  more  so  the 
frequency  of  asyndeton  in  toneless  passages.  In  §28,  indeed,  this 
figure  is  employed  with  force ;  but  there  are  nine  examples  (§1. 10 
eVr.  kpy.  ii  bis.  14.  17  l^  aur.  18  bis.  26)  of  those  asyndetic  contin- 
uations which  are  altogether  infrequent  with  Demosthenes.  In  §4 
and  §31  the  clause  in  asyndeton  stands  in  appositional  relation  to 
the  preceding,  as  in  Dem.  29.3;  but  the  short  asyndetic  sentences 
which  break  the  direct  quotations  in  §15  are  as  unlike  Demos- 
thenes as  is  that  manner  of  narration  (cf  Hug,  cited  by  Blass,  III 
438).  This  lavish  use  of  the  unemphatic  asyndeton  suggests  a 
study  of  Lysias  and  an  exaggeration  of  one  of  the  devices  by 
which  he  achieved  simplicity  and  avoided  the  appearance  of 
rhetorical  artifice:  and  the  faint  touches  of  irony  in  §12  and  §27 
might  be  copied  from  Lys.  32.  22.  Neither  in  those  two  passages 
nor  in  §24  {too  Gotpoo)  do  we  find  anything  resembling  the  ironic 
power  of  Demosthenes ;  and  this  fact,  the  weakness  of  the  pro- 
oemium,  the  lack  of  repetition,  and  the  dominant  quality  of  the 
asyndeton  seem  to  tell  with  conclusive  weight  against  the  genu- 
ineness of  the  speech,  although  at  some  points  its  style  approaches 
the  Demosthenic  type. 

Or.  33. — The  well-knit  and  lucid  speech  against  Apaturius  is 
held  together  by  an  abundance  of  deictic  words  and  phrases 
(3.  i),  but  exhibits  otherwise  none  of  the  features  which  serve  to 
mark  the  power  and  art  of  Demosthenes.  There  is  a  good  deal 
of  interrogation,  but  it  is  all  assertive  or  argumentative;  the  sug- 
gestion is  wanting,  and  the  challenging  tone  is  only  slightly  felt 
in  §23  and  §25 ;  there  is  no  rhetorical  answer.  The  denunciatory 
phrase  dq  touto  duaideiat;  directed  at  the  adversary  in  §22,  at  his 
confederate  in  §19,  lacks  sharp  utterance,  as,  indeed,  the  qualities 
of  sharpness  and  strenuousness  are  generally  wanting  in  this  pleas- 
antly smooth  and  persuasive  composition.  The  single  instance 
of  repetition  lies  in  the  sortof  antistrophe  at  the  close — a  position 
which  this  figure  nowhere  has  in  any  Demosthenean  oration.  Of 
irony  in  the  Demosthenic  sense  there  is  none,  and  only  an  isolated 
touch  of  energetic  reprobation  in  §37  (ro  pfffzou  x.r.i.').  Asyndeton 
occurs  only  in  a  few  passages,  chiefly  with  weak  tone  :  after  testi- 


36 

mony  (§9.  16),  in  indistinct  apposition  (§32-3),  in  a  question  (§37), 
at  the  beginning  of  the  short  epilogue  (§38).  It  is  worth  while  to 
compare  Or.  55,  which  contains  only  seven  examples  of  asyndeton 
(§13  bis.  15.  24  bis.  25.  31),  by  far  the  smallest  number  to  be  found 
in  any  of  the  fourteen  speeches,  but  these  almost  wholly  in  warm 
or  emphatic  passages.  These  particulars  only  confirm  the  obser- 
vation of  Blass  (III  515),  that  we  miss  here  the  life  and  power  of 
Demosthenes ;  and  in  the  prooemium  we  may  note,  not  only  the 
colorless  and  impersonal  character  on  which  Blass  remarks,  but 
also  the  strong  contrast  with  the  genuine  prooemia ;  their  tone  is 
always  intensely  personal,  save  in  Or.  57,  where  the  generaliza- 
tions are  justified  by  the  general  movement  of  which  Euxitheus 
finds  himself  unwillingly  a  part.  Of  the  delicate  workmanship, 
the  fine  threads  of  suggestion  linking  this  part  to  the  whole,  such 
as  are  seen  in  the  maturer  speeches  of  Demosthenes,  there  is  here 
no  trace.  As  to  the  manner  of  introducing  the  demurrer  in  the 
prooemium  and  having  the  law  at  once  read,  this  is  at  any  rate 
more  smoothly  managed  than  the  similar  arrangement  in  Or.  38. 
But  that  speech,  with  all  its  imperfection,  has  the  high  artistic 
qualities  of  vividness  and  passion ;  this,  which  in  its  uniform,  tame 
correctness,  has  all  'the  necessary  and  none  of  the  superfluous 
virtues,  is  stamped  with  a  spiritual  ixzrpioxric,  possible  to  the  art  of 
Lysias,  but  not  to  the  fiery  temperament  of  Demosthenes. 

Or.  34. — The  speech  against  the  merchant  Phormio,  condemned 
in  brief  terms  alike  by  Schafer  and  Blass  as  not  of  Demosthenic 
type,  exhibits  only  characteristics  confirmatory  of  their  judgment. 
The  prooemium  is  lacking  as  well  in  finish  and  suggestiveness  as 
in  the  clearness  and  point  that  appear  even  in  the  lengthiest  and 
least  forcible  of  the  genuine  prooemia,  that  of  Or.  29 ;  the  grounds 
for  the  demurrer  are  urged  in  §4,  essential  portions  of  the  narra- 
tive are  briefly  recited  in  §2  and  §5,  and  as  a  result  of  this  antici- 
pation the  point  at  issue  is  loosely  and  diflfusely  stated  (§5).  A 
corresponding  looseness  in  the  construction  of  the  whole  is  marked 
by  the  very  small  number  of  deictic  expressions.  The  particles 
Toivw  and  ixh  oov  are  indeed  used  with  sufficient  frequency,  the 
former  eight,  the  latter  seven  times  ;  of  monitory  verbs  or  demon- 
stratives there  are  only  some  ten,  and  these  are  nowhere  used 
with  the  accumulation  characteristic  of  Demosthenes.  The  pro- 
portion, then,  is  about  1.7,  equal  to  that  of  the  passionate  deuter- 
ology  against  Aphobus  which  stands  lowest  in  this  respect  among 


37 

the  genuine  speeches.  But  Or.  34  is  not  at  all  passionate ;  the 
tone  is  argumentative  throughout,  and  for  argument  Demosthenes, 
as  we  have  seen,  employs  these  turns  of  phrase  lavishly  and  often 
in  mass.  In  consequence  of  this  weakness  we  find  transitions 
which  are  very  slightly  marked,  in  §22  only  by  Sij,  in  §46  by  fxsv 
oov ;  in  the  former  passage  the  writer  proceeds  with  no  sensible 
demarcation  from  narrative  to  argument,  in  the  latter  there  is 
almost  an  absolute  severance  of  connection.  Repetition  does  not 
occur ;  the  suggestive  question  and  the  challenge  are  alike  absent, 
as  is  the  rhetorical  answer,  save  in  the  weak  form  of  appeal  (§49 
fifjdaixoiq  u)  a.  d.).  Asyndeton  is  very  infrequent  and  without  force 
(§2.  4.  16.  17.  50)  ;  even  the  asyndetic  sixoTwq  (§51),  following  not 
on  a  statement  of  fact  but  on  an  assumption,  fails  of  the  ringing 
effect  which  it  has  in  Dem.  30.  37, 36.  25.  30,  57.  4  ;  in  a  like  case  to 
this  Demosthenes  (57.  33)  uses  a  connective,  and  the  same  distinc- 
tion is  made  by  Lysias  (contrast  Lys.  25.  27  with  16.  16,  26.  17). 
There  is  no  irony,  or  at  least  that  discovered  by  Blass  in  §35  is 
very  faint  and  resides  rather  in  the  contrasted  facts  than  in  the 
colorless  expression  ;  a  comparison  with  Lys.  12.  86  shows  how  a 
pointed  neatness  of  phrase  serves  to  bring  out  the  irony  of  con- 
trast, which  is  here  obscured  by  diffuseness  of  utterance.  The 
absence  of  this  figure  is  the  more  striking  as  the  case  offered 
much  opportunity  for  its  use,  and  as  apostrophe,  which  with 
Demosthenes  is  often  ironical,  is  freely  employed  in  long  passages, 
§26-8  and  §30-3.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  main  arguments 
are  brought  forward  in  these  passages,  in  the  first  of  which  apos- 
trophe is  doubled  throughout  with  interrogation ;  Demosthenes 
is  not  accustomed  to  burden  either  of  these  lively  figures  with  any 
weight  of  argument,  and  this  large  employment  of  both  in  such  a 
use  shows  misapplication  of  rhetorical  passion.  The  brief  address 
to  the  judges  in  §32  and  §33  might  remind  us  of  Dem.  36. 
51  and  45.  80.  82 ;  but  there  the  speaker,  having  been  as  it  were 
swept  away  in  the  torrent  of  apostrophic  denunciation,  recalls  his 
real  audience,  turns  to  it,  and  seems  under  the  compelling  influence 
of  passion  to  return  again  to  his  enemy ;  here,  no  such  artistic  effect 
is  produced,  because  the  fault  in  art  which  lies  in  arguing  with  the 
adversary  is  only  felt  the  more  upon  renewal ;  the  short,  sharp 
turns  of  Demosthenes,  such  as  we  see  in  36.  20,  are  not  from,  but 
to,  the  opponent.  The  effect  of  ra;rc£vonyc,  which  these  different 
phenomena  produce,  is  heightened  by  the  manner  in  which  denun- 


38 

ciatory  words  are  employed.  Here  a  certain  indirectness  is 
apparent.  Thus  y.a/.obpyriij.a  (§29)  stands  in  an  appeal  (and  con- 
trast the  reinforcement  of  xay.oopyia  with  riyr^ri  in  45.  39)  ;  adUriiia 
(§7)  is  introduced  without  emphasis,  as  may  be  seen  by  compar- 
ison with  the  vigorous  use  of  adr/.uq  in  the  Demosthenean  passages 
cited  above ;  Tzovrjpoq  (§20)  is,  so  to  speak,  quoted  as  a  finding  of  the 
court,  and  avatff'/uvrax;  (§19)  has  only  a  general  application.  On 
the  other  hand,  as  the  final  word  before  the  formal  epilogue  we 
find  i^ptcov,  a  harsh  epithet  not  used  by  Demosthenes,  at  least  in 
any  private  oration ;  this,  coming  in  at  the  last  like  a  forcible- 
feeble  splutter  of  wrath,  is  roughly  destructive  of  the  dignity  which 
should  belong  to  this  part  of  the  speech  and  which  is  always  to  be 
felt  in  the  close  of  a  Demosthenic  oration. 

Or.  35. — The  speech  against  Lacritus  contains  most  of  the 
features  which  I  have  taken  as  tests  of  Demosthenic  composition, 
and  some  of  these  do  not  altogether  lack  Demosthenic  tone. 
Thus,  in  interrogation  we  meet  with  one  example  of  the  sugges- 
tion (§22),  two  of  the  challenge  (§45.  49)  ;  the  short  apostrophic 
turns  in  §45.  46.  47.  49  have  much  the  air  of  those  noticed  in  the 
genuine  orations.  Asyndeton  is  freely  employed,  sometimes  with 
force,  though  the  cumulative  form,  found  in  all  of  the  fourteen 
speeches  excepting  31,  is  missing.  Of  repetition  we  have  epana- 
diplosis  in  §16  (ourofft — ooroq'),  where  the  punctuation  of  Bekker 
is,  I  think,  to  be  preferred  to  that  of  Dindorf  and  Blass ;  there  is 
no  pause,  but  a  quick  recovery  of  the  dropped  thread  of  speech. 
In  §54  {rraiq  oux  aduelffff-s — tzux;  oux  ddixel)  a  CUrious  anacoluthic 
anaphora  is  to  be  noticed,  which  finds  parallels  in  Isae.  2.  42-3 
(^8stvdv  TO  Tzpdyp.a — izajq  oux  av  d.  r.  tt.),  ib.  43  (raDr'  iffr).  rd  Troiooura — 
T,  i,  Tct  XutlOovto) J  9.  15  (tw  oov  otv  0/jLaJv  ^avsoy  TiiffTov — TTOJq  rourov 
TtiffTou),  and  in  Lys.  12.  36  (owz  o2>v  deivov — oux  apa  xpt])i  but  not  in 
Demosthenes,  to  whom  anacoluthon  seems  to  have  been  in  general 
repugnant.  The  style  of  Isaeus  is  also  recalled  by  the  inartistic 
repetition  of  yiypanrat  raora  (§19.  22.  2^)/Ai^rjva^e  Tzapi^etv  aviizaipa 
(§37.  39),  ^tv^oq  ehai  (§41).  The  proportion  of  deictic  expressions 
(2.08  per  page)  is  lower  than  in  Or.  39,  which  does  not  deal  with 
legal  points,  and  which  moreover,  in  the  passionate  suppositions 
that  take  the  place  of  argument,  supplies  in  some  degree  the  want 
of  ordinary  transitional  formulas  by  such  interjectional  substitutes 
as  elev  (§13.  18.  30),  xaXwq  (§15).  Further  the  particles  rotvov  and 
fxh  oov  appear  rarely,  the  second  three  times  (§3.  21.  55),  the  first, 


39 

which  is  by  far  the  favorite  with  Demosthenes,  only  once.  The 
rhetorical  answer  occurs  (§26),  not  however  in  the  true  Demos- 
thenic form  of  curt  affirmation  or  denial,  but  overloaded  with  angry 
denunciation.  This  overloading  is  observable  throughout  in  a 
tone  which  Blass  calls  witzelnd,  but  which  seems  to  me  rather  to 
denote  unbridled  indignation  ;  the  opening  words  {ov8ev  xatvov 
X.  r.  L)  have  no  coloring  of  ridicule  or  bitter  jest,  but  are  mere 
vehement  abuse,  and  this  recurs  again  and  again  to  the  end,  and 
is  especially  marked  in  the  irony,  which  is  not  cutting,  like  that  of 
Demosthenes,  but  heavy  and  rough  ;'cf  §16  {iJ-iya  Tzpayixa),  40. 
41.  43  ((Toc'wraroy),  49  {jxo^mvj  dixaiov').  The  vocabulary  of  invective 
is,  as  Blass  remarks,  lavish  and  coarse ;  there  are  as  many  utter- 
ances of  this  sort  as  in  the  earliest  of  the  genuine  speeches,  27, 
and  the  abusive  effect  is  heightened  by  a  reinforcement  of  one 
epithet  with  another  which  passes  beyond  the  bounds  of  Demos- 
thenic force  into  sheer  violence.  Compare,  in  addition  to  the 
instances  cited  by  Blass,  §12  {jzovrjporaroi  xat  adixairarot),  32  (^^deXu- 
ptav  xai  (I'sodoXoyiav^^  39  (xaxaupyoi  <jo<pt.ffrai  xai  TZ(r^-qpo\  av-&pu)-oi). 
The  failure  in  good  taste  and  artistic  reserve  is  strongly  brought 
out  by  a  comparison  of  this  speech  with  37  or  45.  The  opponent 
of  Pantaenetus  is  also  hotly  indignant  at  the  impudence  of  his 
adversary ;  as  for  Apollodorus,  his  anger,  inflamed  by  personal 
hatred  as  well  as  by  pecuniary  losses,  repels  us  by  its  implacable 
bitterness;  but  in  each  case  the  expression  which  Demosthenes 
lends  to  indignation  gives  it  power  and  weight,  and  the  blending 
of  a  fine  and  keen  irony  with  an  assumption  of  loftiness  exalts 
the  character  of  his  client  and  humbles  the  adversary.  The  pro- 
oemium  and  epilogue  too  have  the  usual  dignity  of  tone,  each 
speech  rising  gradually  into  a  storm  of  passion  which  at  the  close 
subsides  into  appeal.  In  Or.  35  there  is  neither  superiority  of 
attitude  nor  refinement  of  tone,  and  the  virulence  of  the  prooe- 
mium  is  reflected  in  the  epilogue ;  compare  the  turgid  phrases  in 
§55  (j-oXdX^iy — <70(pi'^ou(nv,  Tvoi^Tjpww — 7cavoopyou(Ti)  with  the  simple 
TouTouq  rrjq  ayav  xoXaxeia'Z  kTZLff^^yjffsrs,  45.  88,  and  with  the  nobly 
expressed  plea  for  the  maintenance  of  justice  in  37.  60. 

Or.  40. — The  second  speech  against  Boeotus  cannot  properly 
be  compared  with  the  first;  the  latter,  turning  on  a  point  of  senti- 
ment, owes  pardy  to  this  fact  its  surpassing  liveliness  and  brilliant 
changefulness ;  the  former,  dealing  with  a  matter  of  business, 
would  naturally  be  more  quiet  and  sober  in  coloring  and  tone. 


40 

Considering,  indeed,  the  relations  of  the  parties  to  the  suit,  we 
might  look  for  some  such  mixture  of  strong  feeling  with  close 
argument  as  is  exhibited  in  Orr.  36  and  45 ;  but  the  two  brothers 
had  perhaps  hardly  been  intimate  enough  to  feel  that  cordial 
hatred  which  distinguishes  the  quarrel  between  Phormio  and 
Apollodorus.  The  speech  displays,  in  fact,  neither  strength  of 
passion  nor  marked  force  of  reasoning  ;  its  lax  structure  is  reflected 
in  the  comparative  weakness  of  deictic  expressions,  the  propor- 
tion of  which  (2.28)  is  about  the  same  as  in  Or.  39,  The  lack  of 
the  apostrophe  it  has  in  common  with  Orr.  27  and  30;  but  how 
far  it  is  from  possessing  the  compact  energy  of  these  speeches 
appears  by  the  almost  complete  absence  of  asyndeton,  of  which 
only  two  feeble  examples  occur  (§21.  47).  The  want  of  that 
dramatic  force  which  this  figure  often  gives  is  further  emphasized 
by  the  fact  that  we  find  neither  the  challenge,  the  suggestion,  nor 
the  rhetorical  answer ;  in  short,  none  of  those  abrupt  and  telling 
checks  to  the  flow  of  speech  by  which  Demosthenes  at  once  fixes 
and  reposes  the  attention.  The  rhetorical  value  of  asyndeton 
could  hardly  be  better  illustrated  than  from  this  drowsy  stream  of 
constant  polysyndeton ;  the  reluctance  to  pause,  which  the  per- 
sistent connectives  indicate,  gives  the  impression  that  the  orator 
is  afraid  of  not  keeping  the  interest  of  his  audience,  and  thus  dulls 
the  interest  and  fatigues  the  mind  of  the  reader.  This  anxiety 
finds  definite  expression  in  the  words  Sid  rd  oXiyov  ehat  txot  to  ddwp 
(§38).  Now  the  average  length  of  the  Demosthenean  private 
speech  is  thirteen  and  a  half  pages — or,  if  we  omit  the  twodeuter- 
ologies,  fourteen  and  a  half;  this  one,  with  its  sixteen  and  a  half, 
seems  quite  long  enough  for  an  effective  development  of  the  case ; 
compare,  at  the  end  of  Orr.  36  and  38,  the  proud  i&pa  to  oSwp, 
It  is  true  that  Or.  41  ends  with  the  words  7:pd<;  SXiyov  o8wp  avay- 
xa^o/xevoq  Xeyecv ;  but  it  is  really  very  short  (8i  pp.)>  and  that  final 
phrase  at  the  close  of  a  successfully  completed  demonstration  is 
merely  a  dignified  note  of  complaint,  while  this,  occurring  in  the 
middle  of  the  speech,  produces  an  inartistic  jar  by  revealing  the 
doubts  which  beset  the  speaker's  mind.  I  cannot  therefore  agree 
with  the  remark  of  Blass  (III  454) :  "  Ueberhaupt  ist  der  Aus- 
druck  .  .  .  rednerisch  kraftig";  it  has  persuasiveness  to  a  degree, 
but  no  force.  That  the  writer  was  a  student  of  Demosthenes  is 
suggested  not  only  by  the  borrowings  from  the  first  speech  against 
Boeotus,  but  also  by  the  opening  words  of  the  prooemium,  which 


recall  those  of  Or.  55,  but  lack  their  neatness  and  charm ;  here 
the  general  reflection  is  laid  down  in  the  usual  serious  way,  there 
the  apa  turns  it  into  a  discovery  made  by  the  speaker,  and  so 
gives  us  at  once  the  vision  of  his  wide-eyed  innocence.  The 
touches  of  insinuation  in  %%X,k7zXrirTiaXsv  x.r.k.),  23  (jn — xofxcffdp.evov'), 
and  the  air  of  moral  superiority  in  §12  (^iycb  5' — ineiffr^rjv  abrw), 
48-9  (xdyu)  fiev — dyavaxreTv)  are  sufficiently  in  the  tone  of  the  preced- 
ing speech  to  show  that  this  writer  wished  to  preserve  to  Man- 
titheus  the  attitude  in  which  Demosthenes  had  placed  him ;  but 
he  lacked  the  ironic  power  by  which  the  latter  made  this  reserve 
appear  the  restraint  imposed  by  a  sense  of  right  and  decorum  on 
a  proud  and  energetic  temperament.  There  is  a  slight  touch  of 
irony  in  §28  {axmsp  xX-qrrjpsq)  and  an  easy  sneer  in  §32  (yrj  AC  x. 
T.  f.)  ;  but  these  do  not  smack  strongly  of  Demosthenes.  Denun- 
ciation is  direct  enough  in  §20.  34.  43.  52,  though  the  vocabulary 
is  not  altogether  Demosthenean :  we  have  xaxoupyoq,  xaxoupywv 
{xaxoupyTjGai  Dem.  45.  30),  roA/xa,  roX[xrip6(:^  iTzi^ouXor: ;  the  nominal, 
form  in  these  last  gives  an  aggressive  force  hardly  to  be  felt  in 
the  common  use  of  the  corresponding  verbs.  Repetition  is  found 
in  two  examples  of  anaphora  (§42.  59)  and  one  of  the  rare  epana- 
diplosis  (§53)  ;  but  this  last  is  an  isolated  instance  of  unusually 
vigorous  expression,  and  the  representation  of  this  one  figure  does 
not  make  up  for  the  absences  and  weaknesses  which  have  been 
noted. 

Or.  46. — The  second  speech  against  Stephanus  must  be  set 
against  the  other  deuterologies,  28  and  31 ;  if  it  were  by  Demos- 
thenes, we  should  expect  to  find  it  holding  the  same  relation  to 
Or.  45  that  these  do  to  their  respective  Xoyoi.  Now  Or.  27  is,  as 
has  been  said  above,  mainly  concerned  with  exposition  and  argu- 
ment, as  is  also  Or.  30,  one  of  the  quietest  in  tone  among  the 
fourteen ;  and  it  is  noteworthy  that  these  two  alone  contain  no 
example  of  apostrophe,  which  means  that  they  are  directed  to  the 
court,  not  at  the  adversary.  But  the  very  purpose  of  the  second 
appearance  is  aggressive ;  in  coming  forward  to  refute  his  oppo- 
nent the  speaker  enters  inevitably  upon  attack ;  and  the  tone  of  the 
Demosthenean  deuterologies  is  in  accordance  with  this  necessity 
of  the  situation.  Apostrophe,  irony,  energetic  asyndeton  abound  ; 
the  prevailing  tone  is  exclamatory,  eager,  indignant ;  the  argu- 
ments are  brief  and  pointed,  clinched  by  passionate  utterance. 
On  the  other  hand  the  two  speeches  against  Stephanus  show  an 


42 

entirely  different  relation  to  each  other.  The  first  is  rich  in  all  the 
figures  and  devices  which  can  enliven  argument  and  convey  feel- 
ing, while  the  second  is  merely  an  array  of  arguments ;  and  this 
inversion  shows  a  weakness  alike  in  logic  and  in  art  wholly  incom- 
patible with  any  theory  of  Demosthenean  authorship  for  46.  The 
other  tests  point  to  the  same  conclusion.  The  challenging  ques- 
tion, indeed,  and  the  apostrophe  are  found  in  combination  (§25. 
28),  and  there  is  an  effective  bit  of  irony  (§19}.  But  the  sugges- 
tion and  the  rhetorical  answer  are  wanting,  as  are  too  all  forms  of 
repetition ;  the  vituperative  word  r.avovpyoq  is  frank  enough,  but 
out  of  place  at  the  very  beginning ;  and  the  extremely  infrequent 
use  of  asyndeton  (§5.  14.  20)  tells  heavily  against  the  speech.  The 
proportion  of  deictic  expressions  (4.  8)  is  much  higher  than  in 
any  genuine  oration  ;  which  seems  at  least  to  show  that  the  writer 
recognized  their  value,  perhaps  too  that  he  exaggerated  their  use 
beyond  need. 

Or.  56. — A.  Schafer  has  shown  that  the  speech  against  Dionys- 
odorus  must  have  been  delivered  after  the  death  of  Demosthenes. 
It  perhaps  comes  nearer  to  the  Demosthenic  type  than  any  of  the 
orations  hitherto  examined,  containing  as  it  does  nearly  all  of  the 
characteristic  features  on  which  I  have  laid  stress.  Denunciation 
is  very  slight,  being  in  fact  confined  to  the  one  word  avainyovroq 
(§41);  but  this  is  uttered  with  much  sharpness  of  emphasis.  Ana- 
phora occurs  once  (§10),  epanadiplosis  once  (§38).  Interrogation 
is  abundant,  with  three  instances  of  the  suggestion  (§2.  27.  38^  and 
three  of  the  challenge  (§39  bis,  40) ;  and  there  is  an  example  of 
the  rhetorical  answer,  §28.  Asyndeton  is  quite  frequent,  and 
apostrophe  is  freely  and  effectively  used ;  compare  the  rapid  turn- 
ing from  the  adversary  to  the  judge  and  again  to  the  adversary  in 
§25,  the  argument  rising  into  emphatic  assertion,  §26-8,  and  into 
denunciation,  §40-2,  the  tone  of  challenge  imparted  to  the  argu- 
ment in  §32  and  §39,  and  the  vigorous  insistence  of  §38.  There 
are,  however,  other  phenomena  which,  if  the  genuineness  of  the 
speech  had  to  be  decided  on  stylistic  grounds,  would  tend  to  cast 
doubt  upon  it.  The  proportion  of  deictic  expressions  (2.0)  is  no 
higher  than  in  Or.  55,  and  the  preponderance  of  {xh  ow  over 
roivuv  (6  :  2)  is  not  Demosthenic.  The  lengthy  prooemium  con- 
tains much  general  reflection  in  §1-2  and  a  long  anticipation  of  the 
narrative  in  §3-4  ;  in  this,  as  in  the  whole  speech,  we  miss  the 
compact  structure  and  pointed  conciseness  of  the  genuine  orations. 


43 

Despite  the  employment  of  vivid  figures,  there  is  rarely  any  vivid 
sharpness  and  curtness  ;  the  livelier  forms  of  question  are  dulled 
by  length  of  phrase  ;  and  the  asyndeton  in  §45,  which  might  fairly 
be  called  cumulative,  lacks,  by  reason  of  the  same  lengthiness,  all 
the  rapidity  and  weight  that  should  belong  to  this  figure.  On  the 
whole,  asyndeton  is  employed  (§7.  21.  22.  23.  27.  36.  37.  40.  46) 
rather  for  deliberate  emphasis  than  in  any  warm  or  quick  tone, 
though  there  is  force  in  the  rhetorical  answer  and  in  Sedffaff^e, 
§40.  Irony  is  found  in  §40  (w  ^sXtktts^  and  §41  (oSrw?  avdpeloq),  in 
the  latter  case  passing  immediately  into  denunciation ;  but  these 
are  slight  instances,  and  the  scornful  familiarity  of  the  vocative 
has  less  propriety  here  than  in  36.  52,  where  it  is  justified  by  the 
intimacy  of  the  two  enemies  and  by  the  tone  of  lofty  rebuke  which 
pervades  that  passage.  In  short,  the  excellences  of  Or.  56  are  not 
superlative  ;  the  writer  is  master  of  his  art  so  far  as  it  was  to  be 
learned,  while  lacking  the  power  and  subtlety  of  expression  which 
only  high  artistic  endowment  could  give. 


,^        ■".  ,      THE 

uuivERSi-rv 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 

Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 

"3'^ay'59AJ 

t  f*^ 

5Feh'65/^^ 

I 

HtC'D  Lt") 

AUG    2'65-ioAl 

/ 

JUL  18  1978 

«ai  C'J.     JUL  1  9  • 

ra. 

T,-n  91  A    !^n«7  Q  '(^s                                     General  Library 

